"Instead of banning every word out there, we should make the mental effort to do better than the political correctness movement that stops at the surface."
I think this is a pretty clear false dichotomy. Doing one doesn't preclude the other. The statement above goes on: "So, let’s call it master-slave, and instead make a call for US, where a sizable black population is very poor, to have free healthcare, to have cops that are less biased against non-white people, to stop death penalty. This makes really a difference." ... those things seem outside the direct control of the ASF. We should try to improve the things we can when we can. +1 on the change On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:24 AM Jon Logan <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this blog post from the founder of Redis sums things up: > http://antirez.com/news/122 > > From the post: > > For example if I’m terminally ill, the “short living request” > terminology may be offensive, it reminds me that I’m going to die, or > that my father is going to die. Instead of banning every word out > there, we should make the mental effort to do better than the > political correctness movement that stops at the surface. > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:05 AM Edward Armes <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I agree with this, and maybe that is the potential the step forward here > > is: issue a statement is issued saying something like this is a complex > > issue and instead of making changes that could cause further division > > within the community we are looking for those that are interested to help > > form a constructive working group that will help influence and resolve > all > > of these issues in a positive way for all not only for project but also > > within the wider group of apache projects. > > > > Edward > > > > > > > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, 11:17 [email protected], <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Language is always changing and the meaning of words is changing, > > > sometimes positively and sometimes negatively. > > > I think that now is time for change again and we should discuss the use > > > of phrases and meanings. > > > > > > Of course we should change "Master Branch" to "Main Branch". > > > But I also think that we shouldn't just make quick changes because it's > > > opportune and hastily change a few words. > > > > > > An example: We could change Master/Slave to Leader/Follower. This may > be > > > a perfect choice for most people in the world. > > > In German Leader is the English word for "Führer". And it is precisely > > > this word that we in Germany do not actually want to use for it. > > > > > > What I mean is that every country and every group (e.g. religion etc.) > > > has its own history and certain words or phrases are just not a perfect > > > choice. > > > We should try to go the ethically correct way worldwide. > > > > > > This concerns the adaptation of current words and phrases with a view > to > > > all: in English, Indian, Chinese, German etc. but also for indigenous > > > peoples, different religions etc. > > > And cultural differences should also be taken into account. > > > > > > What I would wish for: > > > Apache.org should set up an "Ethics Board". A group of people of > > > different genders, all colors, religions and from different countries > > > and cultures all over our world. > > > This Ethics Board should find good and for no one discriminating words > > > or phrases for all the areas that stand out today as offensive. > > > > > > And it would be nice if not only computer scientists participated, but > > > also ethicists, philosophers, engineers, various religious people, > > > chemists, biologists, physicists, sociologists, etc. > > > > > > And this Council should set binding targets for all projects. > > > > > > Am 18.06.2020 um 09:36 schrieb Pierre Villard: > > > >> In my perspective this should be an issue for the entire community. > > > Being > > > >> able to identify an issue that directly affects another person but > not > > > >> one’s self is the definition of privilege. If I can look at how the > > use > > > of > > > >> these words in someone’s daily life or career impacts them > negatively, > > > > when > > > >> the change would not harm me at all, I see that as a failure on my > > > part. I > > > >> understand the desire to hear from the silent majority, but active > > > >> participation and discussion on the mailing list is the exact > measure > > > >> described by the Apache process for participation in the community. > > > Those > > > >> who speak here are the ones who will have a voice. > > > > I could not agree more with the above. > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 18 juin 2020 à 04:29, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > > > >> I suppose I was a bit remiss in not unwinding and/or summarizing > some > > of > > > >> what was in that yetus thread to prime the discussion, but a some of > > > what > > > >> Andy is mentioning is expanded on a bit in this ietf document [1], > > > which is > > > >> linked in one of the articles. > > > >> > > > >> 1. https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 10:02 PM Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Hi Edward, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’ll reply inline. > > > >>> > > > >>>> - Some of the terms proposed are not industry standard and may > > > >>> potentially > > > >>>> cause significant issue for non-english speakers. > > > >>> I actually believe making these changes will _improve_ the clarity > > for > > > >>> non-english speakers. “Whitelist” and “blacklist” confer no > inherent > > > >> reason > > > >>> to mean allow and deny other than connotative biases. “Allow” and > > > “deny” > > > >>> explicitly indicate the verb that is happening. Another example is > > > branch > > > >>> naming. “Masters” don’t have “branches”. “Trunks” do. These terms > > make > > > >>> _more_ sense for a non-English speaker than the current terms. > > > >>> > > > >>>> - For each change that is made can we guarantee that we will not > > lose > > > >>>> clarity of meaning, and then have revert the change down the line > if > > > >> the > > > >>>> change causes a drop in usage. > > > >>> I don’t expect the community will opt to change the new terms back > to > > > >> ones > > > >>> with negative connotations in the future. If there is discussion > > about > > > >> it, > > > >>> this thread will provide good historical context for why the > decision > > > was > > > >>> made to change it, just as the mailing list discussions do for > other > > > code > > > >>> changes. > > > >>> > > > >>>> - Of what percentage of people is this truly an issue for and what > > > >>>> percentage isn't. Any change that has the potential to cause a > major > > > >>> split > > > >>>> in the community, there must be as close as possible to a > majority, > > > and > > > >>> not > > > >>>> just from those that are vocal and active on the mailing lists. > > > >>>> Disscustions on other groups are turning toxic, and in some cases > > are > > > >>>> potentially leading to the collapse of these projects where these > > > >> changes > > > >>>> are being implemented with what appears to be without the > agreement > > of > > > >> a > > > >>>> signifficant chunk of the community. > > > >>>> > > > >>> In my perspective this should be an issue for the entire community. > > > Being > > > >>> able to identify an issue that directly affects another person but > > not > > > >>> one’s self is the definition of privilege. If I can look at how the > > use > > > >> of > > > >>> these words in someone’s daily life or career impacts them > > negatively, > > > >> when > > > >>> the change would not harm me at all, I see that as a failure on my > > > part. > > > >> I > > > >>> understand the desire to hear from the silent majority, but active > > > >>> participation and discussion on the mailing list is the exact > measure > > > >>> described by the Apache process for participation in the community. > > > Those > > > >>> who speak here are the ones who will have a voice. > > > >>> > > > >>>> - From a personal perspective, I sit on the autism spectrum and > have > > > >>> grown > > > >>>> up with people using words that are very offensive and have hurt > me > > > >>> badly. > > > >>>> Instead of having these words as offensive and untouchable. Myself > > and > > > >>>> others have instead made these words our own and made them lose > the > > > >>>> negative connotations they have. As such, I do find the current > > > >>>> disscustions deeply alarming and feels like they start to border > > into > > > >> the > > > >>>> realm of censorship. > > > >>>> > > > >>> I think it’s admirable that you have responded to negative > > > circumstances > > > >>> in that way. I also recognize that not everyone has that > opportunity. > > > If > > > >> we > > > >>> can take these actions as a community to improve the experience for > > > >> others, > > > >>> I am in favor of that. > > > >>> > > > >>>> - One final point (and potentially controversial), A good chunk of > > the > > > >>>> wording that is proposed to be changed. Is being done so on the > > > >>>> "modern"/"street" definition of these words and not the actual > > > >>> definition. > > > >>>> Language should change and evolve to introduce clarity, but right > > now > > > >>> does > > > >>>> this change improve the clarity across the engineering sector and > I > > > >>> believe > > > >>>> it won't. > > > >>> > > > >>> I’ll paraphrase Emily Kager here with “developers spend an > inordinate > > > >>> amount of time and energy arguing about the meaning and semantics > of > > > >>> variable and method names, but pretend exclusionary terms are > > > >> meaningless.” > > > >>> [1] If we can expend that much energy deciding if a method creates > > vs. > > > >>> builds vs. forms an imaginary concept like a > > > >>> LibraryFrameworkWrapperDecorator, I refuse to concede that we can > and > > > in > > > >>> fact should do so with the terms that actually affect our community > > > >>> members’ lives. > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] https://twitter.com/EmilyKager/status/1271102865889734656 < > > > >>> https://twitter.com/EmilyKager/status/1271102865889734656> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Andy LoPresto > > > >>> [email protected] > > > >>> [email protected] > > > >>> He/Him > > > >>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Jun 17, 2020, at 6:43 PM, Edward Armes <[email protected] > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>> This is a difficult issue and causes no small amount of friction > > every > > > >>>> time. I'm personally against this for the following reassons: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - Some of the terms proposed are not industry standard and may > > > >>> potentially > > > >>>> cause significant issue for non-english speakers. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - For each change that is made can we guarantee that we will not > > lose > > > >>>> clarity of meaning, and then have revert the change down the line > if > > > >> the > > > >>>> change causes a drop in usage. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - Of what percentage of people is this truly an issue for and what > > > >>>> percentage isn't. Any change that has the potential to cause a > major > > > >>> split > > > >>>> in the community, there must be as close as possible to a > majority, > > > and > > > >>> not > > > >>>> just from those that are vocal and active on the mailing lists. > > > >>>> Disscustions on other groups are turning toxic, and in some cases > > are > > > >>>> potentially leading to the collapse of these projects where these > > > >> changes > > > >>>> are being implemented with what appears to be without the > agreement > > of > > > >> a > > > >>>> signifficant chunk of the community. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - From a personal perspective, I sit on the autism spectrum and > have > > > >>> grown > > > >>>> up with people using words that are very offensive and have hurt > me > > > >>> badly. > > > >>>> Instead of having these words as offensive and untouchable. Myself > > and > > > >>>> others have instead made these words our own and made them lose > the > > > >>>> negative connotations they have. As such, I do find the current > > > >>>> disscustions deeply alarming and feels like they start to border > > into > > > >> the > > > >>>> realm of censorship. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - One final point (and potentially controversial), A good chunk of > > the > > > >>>> wording that is proposed to be changed. Is being done so on the > > > >>>> "modern"/"street" definition of these words and not the actual > > > >>> definition. > > > >>>> Language should change and evolve to introduce clarity, but right > > now > > > >>> does > > > >>>> this change improve the clarity across the engineering sector and > I > > > >>> believe > > > >>>> it won't. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Edward > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, 01:11 Andy LoPresto, <[email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >>>>> I am a proponent of making this change and also using allow/deny > > > list, > > > >>>>> meddler-in-the-middle, etc. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Here is a blog [1] with easy instructions for executing the > change > > in > > > >>> git, > > > >>>>> although I don’t know if there is any Apache-integration specific > > > >>> changes > > > >>>>> we would also need. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> [1] > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > > > > https://www.hanselman.com/blog/EasilyRenameYourGitDefaultBranchFromMasterToMain.aspx > > > >>>>> Andy LoPresto > > > >>>>> [email protected] > > > >>>>> [email protected] > > > >>>>> He/Him > > > >>>>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D > EF69 > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:06 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I suspect it would be fairly easy to make this change. We do, I > > > >> think, > > > >>>>>> have whitelist/blacklist in there somewhere but im not sure how > > > >>> involved. > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:04 PM Tony Kurc <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> All, > > > >>>>>>> I've seen the discussion started on other projects [1][2], so I > > > >> wanted > > > >>>>> to > > > >>>>>>> kick off a discussion to determine whether this is something > nifi > > > >>> could > > > >>>>>>> look at too. Allen Wittenauer's post to yetus captures the why > > and > > > >>> some > > > >>>>> of > > > >>>>>>> the how, so rather than copy and pasting, you can take a look > at > > > >> what > > > >>>>> he's > > > >>>>>>> done. Thoughts? > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Tony > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> 1. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >> > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd38afa9fb6c0dcd77d1a677f1152b7398b3bda93c9106b3393149d10%40%3Cdev.yetus.apache.org%3E > > > >>>>>>> 2. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >> > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0825eec0c84296bdab7cf898a987f06355443241ca02b2aaa51d3ef9%40%3Cdev.accumulo.apache.org%3E > > > >>>>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >
