[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: avoiding the bias in vocabulary
|
From: |
Daniel Pocock |
|
Subject: |
Re: avoiding the bias in vocabulary |
|
Date: |
Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:59:04 +0000 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 |
On 15/02/2020 21:30, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> On 15/02/2020 21:11, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
>> On 2020-02-15 09:56, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> There are a lot of words used in various discussions today that have
>>> some bias.
>>>
>>> For example, the word /ban/ is quite disparaging to the victim. Simply
>>> using the word continues the bias.
>>
>> Note that this word is quite central in the "Code of Conduct" proposed
>> on the
>> disruptive, deceptive "gnu.tools" site.
>>
>> There's gonna be witch hunts if these brown shirt scoundrels have their
>> way.
>
> Using the word ban in a formal document is incredibly immature.
>
> It implies that this is more like a WhatsApp group than an organization
> of professionals.
>
An extended list:
ban => censor
privacy policy => privacy waiver
code of conduct => code of obedience
contributor license agreement => unpaid employment agreement
(applicable to some of the badder CLAs)
permissive license => doormat license
the difference between Open Source and Free Software?
=> white-collar modern-day slavery
Can anybody think of other examples of terms that are misleading or biased?
Regards,
Daniel