Scott Lawrence wrote:
> I think that if someone wants to produce a language pack for IRC geeks
> or gamers, that would be an appropriate place to use 'kick'.  I'm sure
> that such a language pack would be very colorful (and that I'd
> understand all of it), but I agree with Woof that the standard version
> should use less colloquial terminology.  I like 'Remove'.
I don't necessarily agree with you about it being limited to IRC geeks 
and gamers, but that's a separate debate. :)

I'd be happy with "Remove" as well - I just don't think "Evict" conveys 
the action as well.

> I also prefer 'Exclude/Include'.  I think Joe's point about 'Isolate'
> not being accurate is well taken, but I think that the fix is to make
> the operation really to exclude them - both as a speaker and as a
> listener.  It doesn't make sense to have some be heard but they cannot
> hear.
That might make more sense - we could either mute them or exclude (deaf 
+ mute) them.

> It's most important that we project the image of a
> professionally-produced product.  The people who select phone systems
> are still _mostly_ not clued in to open source or the culture it comes
> from; we don't want to alienate them any more than we need to with lingo
> they don't use themselves.
The point I was mostly trying to make is that "kick" is merely a 
shorthand for "kick out" - just as "Apply" is shorthand for "Apply 
changes" - while "Apply" is obviously more widely used, it is still the 
same thing.

Would everyone be happy if we still stayed away from "Kick" but used 
"Remove" instead?
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev

Reply via email to