--- Comment #3 from Bawolff (Brian Wolff) <> ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Nemo, it's pretty clear you don't support this or any other move to be more
> inclusive about gender issues in the software. By marking this as a dupe of a
> closed bug you've effectively closed the bug. While my previous bug didn't
> seem
> to get to the root of the issue for you. I tried to be more broad with this
> one. If you can better rewrite the issue I welcome it. However if you plan to
> continue to shoot down any move to be more inclusive of all users regardless
> of
> gender and how that is reflected in the software it might be better if you
> don't involve yourself with this or related bugs. Simply closing them,
> marking
> them as dupes or saying it's not possible isn't helpful.

Its your responsibility (as the bug reporter), not Nemo's (as a bug triager) to
write clear bug reports. The way its written now one could easily concluded its
a dupe of the add neuter gender bug. If it isnt clarify how and why it is not.

My reading of the bug is you want to add a third gender that in most languages
refers to the neuter gender, but sometimes refers to the "unknown" gender, and
in english refers to the singular "they". Is that correct? If so, i think this
bug should be wontfixed as neuter and unknown are different things and shouldnt
be mixed. (It edits wikipages vs they (sg) edits wikipages have different

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to