Gabriel Marko <marko.gabriel...@gmail.com> added the comment: @terry.reedy: By madness I meant:
1. blank replacement of words without relevant justification. Collecting 5 links and labelling some words as pejorative or <whatever>ist or do it for “diversity reasons” etc. is no justification. I have no problem with changing wording in documentation but it has to be justified. 2. that IMO this is _de facto_ PC/SJW language mutilation/censorship. I've made my main claim about that here: https://bugs.python.org/issue34605#msg324825 and IMO this is a continuation of the BPO34605 which is not any better or even worse than this one. I also expect more BPOs and PRs like this and IMHO _no more BPOs or PRs like this should be accepted or merged_. If I can advise: There should be a clear statement about how PSF and core developers will handle BPOs and PRs like this or BPO34605 i.e. if you accept/reject them in the future eventually what is going to be the rule of thumb for acceptance. It can bring some clarity into this whole issue/discussion. What I’ve experienced so far is very disappointing. Repeating “there will be no more discussion about this” is not a solution and I consider this to be damaging for Python community’s reputation. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34660> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
