On 16 Apr 2016 3:21 am, "Andrew Sullivan" <a...@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote: > > For whatever it's worth, given the CoC discussions I didn't find that > especially funny (or offensive or anything), but I did think it the > sort of thing that could annoy people already sensitive to this sort > of thing. > > A > > On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 03:00:59AM +0100, Peter Devoy wrote: > > > Although people commonly use $foo $bar in examples, it is actually a > > > misuse of a VERY rude acronym. > > > > > The next time you need to make an example, please try being a little more > > > original (or meaningful) with your variable names. > > > > In light of recent CoC decisions, I would like to propose the > > opposite. I think more expletives would > > diversify the language of the documentation and lower the barriers to > > contribution by individuals more > > dispositioned to use colourful language due to their cultural and/or > > socioeconomic background. O:-) > > > > > > -- > > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org) > > To make changes to your subscription: > > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > a...@anvilwalrusden.com
I shall note that it's still too sore a topic for list humour. I hope that anyone I may have annoyed can seek comfort in the fact that I am an egalitarian and, by extension, if I have accidentally annoyed anyone, it is my sincere hope that I have annoyed everyone else equally! And with that in mind, I was half serious about my point RE: the docs, albeit an absurd one. The subtext was that, to me, it seems that an argument for removing 'rude' words should hold as much weight as one for introducing them or doing nothing at all. Best wishes Peter _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
