On 28.07.26 22:25, Soren Stoutner wrote:
I take this to mean that you agree that the term is (somewhat) offensive.
Possibly, but so are a lot of other words.I reserve CoC-violation levels of offensiveness for words that are more crassly inappropriate and/or (directly or indirectly) target other participants of the discussion in question.
I disagree with the argument that we need to use offensive terms to respond to arguments or actions we disagree with. The best way to deal with such behavior and arguments is to use language which is precise but not offensive.
We don't need them *if* there are inoffensive equivalents that carry roughly the same meaning. This is difficult here, as the act of confidently emitting confidently-factual utter nonsense is in itself offensive, in the military sense of the word: the target is, ultimately, reasoned discourse itself.
-- -- regards -- -- Matthias Urlichs
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
