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

151–160 of 845 posts

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

#151

Post by thedz »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #141
mbillie1 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private company choosing not to allow content for whatever reason is not censorship . People who choose to use the word "retard" are not a protected class, Github can ban this word as they see fit.

False. When Trey Parker and Matt Stone wished to show Muhammad in South Park Comedy Central overruled them and placed a big black censored box over Muhammad in the cartoon. If you want to say that a black box with the word censored doesn't qualify as censorship then you're retarded. You are ever correct that GitHub can ban the word if they want. They're fully within their legal right to do so.

I think where the confusion comes from is that along with many cries of "censorship", there is often a subtext of "this is illegal" or "this is not allowed".

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

#152

Post by _ak »

paulhodge wrote: post #103
niuzeta wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Also, euphemism treadmill. "Retard" in the context of medication means that a drug is slowly and continously released into the bloodstream.

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

#153

Post by slantyyz »

saryant wrote: post #109
slantyyz wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

>> "git" in American English is not at all common.

It's common, except it's a verb, no? As Larry the Cable Guy would say, "git r done".

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

#154

Post by forrestthewoods »

Retra wrote: post #79
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…

You don't think standards of professionalism have a place in open source, or on GitHub?

Given that most user generated content in GitHub is not professional then no, not really. Besides, in most circles profanity is not professional.

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

#155

Post by mehwoot »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #128
mbillie1 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private company choosing not to allow content for whatever reason is not censorship . People who choose to use the word "retard" are not a protected class, Github can ban this word as they see fit.

No, it is censorship. The idea that private companies can't engage in censorship is incorrect, and in conflict with the definition of the word. Doesn't make it bad, necessarily, but it is censorship.

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information

The argument is it isn't suppression because as a private company, people can still choose to engage in that speech elsewhere. The government can actually make laws to stop people from saying certain things in any context.

When a private company does it, they can only do it in the medium they control and for people who choose to use that medium.

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

#156

Post by andylei »

manicdee wrote: post #143
thedz wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. This isn't censorship of the type that is illegal or not allowed. It is a private company deciding a word was inappropriate. 2. It seems like most in this comment thread agree that this action, as a singular act, is a good thing. The word was offensive. Github asked the repo to change it. They did. The end. 3. As for the larger context, the problem with the frequent use of slippery slope arguments and cries of "ce…

First they came for the cussers and swearers, but I didn't speak out because I don't cuss or swear. Then they came for the homophobes and cisgendered bigots, and I cheered them on, because I value diversity. Then they came for the conspiracy theorists, and I didn't speak out because I don't believe the reptoids are evil. Then they came for me, and there was none left to speak out.

the original poem is about how germans systematically eradicated entire racial and political groups.

you're comparing it to a website that won't let you save certain content onto their servers.

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

#157

Post by brandonmenc »

Zikes wrote: post #111
mbillie1 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private company choosing not to allow content for whatever reason is not censorship . People who choose to use the word "retard" are not a protected class, Github can ban this word as they see fit.

Well, in the literal sense it is censorship, being the suppression of materials deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds. A bit like a (likely American) TV censor might "bleep" a word they don't want to expose people's delicate sensibilities to. I mean, that doesn't make it "evil", but a lot of people might say that censorship of any sort is a bit of a grey area. That whole "I disagree wit…

> "I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

When it comes down to it, no one would really do this.

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

#158

Post by Retra »

kazinator wrote: post #114
Retra wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Quac^H^H^H^HMedical professionals also don't use "stomach" to denote the abdomen. So what? > any more I.e. they did ! Lay people still do. Anyway, what matters here is not the standard used by the medical community. I suspect that if a github project had some code that "assists the mentally retarded", it would not bring on the TOS violation police.

Quick biology lesson: stomachs and abdomens are different things. The stomach is an organ inside the abdomen, and the abdomen is a region of the body.

>I.e. they did! Lay people still do.

As do rude people.

Here's what you can do: invent a time machine and go back to a time when the term wasn't offensive. Then your statement that the term isn't offensive will be true. Right now, it isn't.

>Anyway, what matters here is not the standard used by the medical community

If you notice, what I said was "there is a reason [...]." My point, then, was about the reason, not the medical community. It doesn't matter what the medical standards are. What matters is that the term is offensive, a fact which prompted the medical community to stop using it.

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

#159

Post by avolcano »

joeax wrote: post #134
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?

Here's my concern. Let's say I forked a repo and started contributing to it. I built an app that depends on that repo. Suddenly that repo vanishes because GitHub found it some word in it offensive, and my fork and all my contributions vanish. All because of some line like: var x = getX(); // this is retarded, needs fixing I didn't write the said offensive code nor did I even know it was there, and GitHub possibly doe…

But, in this case, GitHub made an effort to get in contact with the repo owner and warn them of their violation of the TOS before taking action. Why do you believe they wouldn't do the same for you?
Post reply on HN