Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 845 posts

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#101

Post by userbinator »

It's particularly ironic to see this coming from a site named GitHub:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/git#Etymology_1

IMHO as far as offensiveness is concerned, 'retard' is pretty far down the scale... and regardless of whether they have the right to do this, I think this whole "politically correct" movement is a pretty disturbing trend. It's basically encouraging people to become offended more easily, and turns straightforward easy-to-understand conversations into watered-down vague doublespeak-ish verbiage. (If you've worked in any large organisations with similar policies, you'll know what I mean. I left that culture behind years ago and don't regret it one bit.)

Are there any GitHub equivalents that support the ideas of free speech and expression (within what the law allows)?

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#102

Post by Panino »

Lots of misuse of the word "censorship" here and any time this subject comes up generally, not just on this site but anywhere the topic is discussed.

What is/are the root issue(s) of this mistaken belief? I typed a few possibilities but they sounded preposterous so I just deleted all that.

Could someone who thinks this is censorship please explain why Github doesn't have the right to control its own privately owned website, and how one single website monitoring the language used there is equivalent to a government "universally" (well, within its borders) coercively prohibiting all such content, such that the person in question is prevented from publishing it anywhere else, even by themselves?

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#103

Post by paulhodge »

niuzeta wrote: post #33
avolcano wrote: post #6

Fine with me. It's an offensive term and GitHub has every right to police their service and ban content like this. Am I supposed to be concerned by this, and if so, why?

Because "retard" may not be the last time, but the first. A precedence would be set that a repository may be shut down due to an arbitrary(not the word I'd use here, but for the sake of argument) reason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#104

Post by Retra »

kazinator wrote: post #78
avolcano wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh sure, but that's not the context it was being used here, and there's no indication that this was some sort of automated email that was sent purely because a use of the word was detected. I don't think anyone's out there trying to ban the word "retard" for its non-derogatory usages. Seems like a weird straw-man to worry about.

Yes it is the context! "retard" is a short form of "mentally retarded". Which means slowed down developmentally. The spark plug gaps being a little too wide in the old noggin to fire reliably. This is not like a completely separate context like "fag" (cigarette) versus "fag" (homosexual). The long form "mentally retarded" isn't offensive, yet "mental retard" is so offensive that it violates terms of service and gets…

>The long form "mentally retarded" isn't offensive

I beg to differ. There's a reason the medical community doesn't use that term anymore.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#105

Post by Lazare »

CoryG89 wrote: post #40

For people who don't see what's wrong here. The issue is not about whether the word 'retard' is or is not offensive to anyone. You need to consider that GitHub currently hosts a large percentage of the web's open source repositories. This is censorship plain and simple, something that IMO has no place in open source. The issue is that there are plenty of things some people might find offensive on GitHub but you dont…

Github is not a public service; they're a private company.

> Who decides what is and is not appropriate?

Github does. That's how that works.

If you prefer you could try and lobby your government to set up some sort of national source code repo. Maybe you'd find the rules on such a thing more to your liking. (Note: You really, really wouldn't.)

Alternatively, you could host your own source code repos, and then you can set the rules.

Edit: More generally, you seem to suggest that a place where a lot of people from different backgrounds come together to try and collaborate and work should be a place with no rules, norms, or even an expectation of basic politeness. Offhand, I'd think the opposite should be true.

You're also conflating something like, eg, efforts to get around the Chinese firewall with people who want to use slurs. People have, in my view, in intrinsic right to do both, but these are still not equivalent actions, and you're not going to reach a sensible conclusion until you abandon that moral relativism. Free speech is valuable, but not all speech is equally valuable.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#106

Post by brianpgordon »

shawnps wrote: post #16

It's in GitHub's TOS that they maintain the ability to remove content they find offensive. So they asked a user to remove something that GitHub found offensive.

Literally nobody is claiming that this is illegal or against the GitHub ToS. The question is whether what they did was reasonable, and how this action impacts people's perception of them.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#108

Post by JoshTriplett »

ryandrake wrote: post #26
avolcano wrote: post #6

Fine with me. It's an offensive term and GitHub has every right to police their service and ban content like this. Am I supposed to be concerned by this, and if so, why?

They have every right to do it, but that doesn't make it productive. Is github really going to anoint itself word-police and comb through the source code of every project they host looking for words they [currently] consider potty-mouthed? Is that really where we have ended up? Do they have nothing better to do? What if the word "fail" offended somebody at github? Should they take down projects that have that variabl…

1) Yes, absolutely; they're creating a more friendly community, and that's a hard problem.

3) Profanity and derogatory language are not the same thing; the difference is critically important. Similarly, if you tell someone to FOAD, the FO isn't the most offensive part of that statement.

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#109

Post by saryant »

slantyyz wrote: post #88
general_failure wrote: post #13

Is there a list of objectionable words/language that one is not supposed to use? A quick search on the f-work gives thousands of hits on github.

Isn't the name "git" (and therefore "github") itself considered pejorative? IIRC, Linus did name the tool after the British slang word. "Git is a mild pejorative with origins in British English for a silly, incompetent, stupid, annoying, senile, elderly or childish person. It is usually an insult, more severe than twit or idiot but less severe than wanker, arsehole or (redacted)." Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wik…

Github is an American company and the use of the word "git" in American English is not at all common. They may not know.

That said, I find this whole thing to be silly. What can you possibly get out of choosing to be the word police?

Re: GitHub threatens to shut down a repository for using the word 'retard'

#110

Post by dwc »

BetaMechazawa wrote: post #47

This obsession with making every single website a hugbox these days is moronic. The word retard/retarded is seldom associated with actual retardation instead it's just a synonym for moron. Even if you dissagree with that you should still be able to see that even if we did s/retard/moron/ or replaced it with git, idiot etc it would still violate the TOS.

> or replaced it with git

Thank you so much for that. The irony is delicious.

Post reply on HN