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

621–630 of 845 posts

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

#621

Post by marrs »

mbillie1 wrote: post #166
toehead2000 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah there was this bakery I think that didn't want to make a cake for a gay wedding. That's ok too right? Or should we burn down their business?

Their refusal did not constitute censorship, if that's what you're asking.

The argument is that Github's censorship is acceptable because those are the terms under which they choose to operate their business and if you don't like it you can go somewhere else (which seems reasonable enough to me).

I think toehead2000 was asking how that squares with a bakery not being allowed to operate their business under certain other terms.

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

#622

Post by mbillie1 »

Zikes wrote: post #246
mbillie1 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case - since you're merely quoting the dictionary without voicing an opinion - I invite you to refrain from further diluting the present discussion with your vacuous commentary. I assure you that the entirety of HN readership can avail itself of word definition services.

If you're going to ask me to put away the dictionary you could try it without dragging out the thesaurus.

Another profound contribution to the discourse! Are you always so topical, or are you making a special effort here?

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

#623

Post by iximeow »

grovulent wrote: post #580
smrtinsert wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's not giving Github enough credit. They are clearly thinking very deeply about professionalism in a social coding frame, and I really doubt they will begin addressing every single complaint they receive. If they do, again, there are existing alternatives or the people are free to build their own. The alarmism over this "incident" is mind boggling. That people don't simple let Github conduct their busines…

Github's actions are entirely understandable - I agree. They are just trying to survive as a business. But I don't agree that the resultant alarmism is mind boggling. Folks are becoming increasingly anxious at the ever increasing signalling costs being applied to innocent discourse; applied by people who have little to no institutional authority, and who certainly aren't recognised by folk AS authorities. In response…

I'd be interested in reading those papers.

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

#624

Post by rlidwka »

samch wrote: post #546

There has, for several years, been a campaign[1] promoted by the Special Olympics to end the r-word. I have signed on, and I encourage others to do so as well. I've known a lot of awesome people with intellectual disabilities who have had this label applied to them in the past. It's amazingly hurtful. No matter how you feel about Github's decision, I encourage all of us to consider how the r-word lingers in daily usa…

> I've known a lot of awesome people with intellectual disabilities who have had this label applied to them in the past. It's amazingly hurtful.

Applying it to someone is hurtful. Using this word is not.

It doesn't matter if you substitute "retard" with "r-word" everywhere, nothing will change. Even if you change the name of the condition, you don't change the condition.

If someone wants to be offensive, I'd bet saying "Hey, you're r-word" will do the job just fine. If it was said with an intention to be offensive, it is offensive. And trying to censor certain words doesn't change it. Because words aren't the problem, people are.

I'll quote George Carlin here:

"They're only words. It's the context that counts. It's the user. It's the intention behind the words that makes them good or bad. The words are completely neutral. {...} For instance, you take the word 'nigger.' There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word 'nigger' in and of itself. It's the racist asshole who's using it that you ought to be concerned about." [1]

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUvdXxhLPa8#t=50s

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

#625

Post by hhandoko »

_jgdh wrote: post #455
hhandoko wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is that you're afraid that GitHub will go down the slippery slope of censorship? If I reframe this another way, do you think this is an acceptable behaviour in a professional setting? Then the issue becomes less of censorship, but more of acceptable conduct. Calling names for laughs is probably OK in private, between friends, but perhaps not appropriate in a public setting. Again, I get that the…

I do not think it is acceptable behaviour in a professional setting. I would be less likely to hire someone who's Github had such references. That does not mean that censoring them is acceptable. Github's previous policy was to allow any content that did not expressly break American laws. I thought this was a good idea, and it was the justification behind keeping the GreatFire repo up, even in the face of DoS attacks…

I get what you mean. We are getting into some grey areas though, where does GitHub draw the line?

I still think that it's not a matter of the law, but one of conduct. GitHub probably has some ideals on how their service should be used, and this instance the language did not match up to their ideals. What do you think GitHub should do?

It's probably the same issues reddit mods have when trying to maintain their community ideals.

I also get that `git` was based on something offensive, but it has taken a whole new meaning since it's attached to a particular method of version control. However, `retard` is still derogatory however way it is put.

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

#626

Post by konradb »

PopeOfNope wrote: post #273
ectoplasm wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't, OP implied it by using the term free speech.

So this entire thread has been a lesson in the pointlessness of pedanticism.

Perhaps 'pedantry' would be more idiomatic? :)

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

#627

Post by PopeOfNope »

dmansen wrote: post #592
PopeOfNope wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Github is not a public service; they're a private company. They're both. They're a private company that offers a public service. As such, they can't do whatever they want. For example, if they wanted to ban all repos written by black men, that would be illegal. Nobody is suggesting that banning a repo for using a bad word is illegal. A breach of trust, a breach of ethics and a breach of reliability[0], but not illega…

the context would be obvious. your hypothetical is a silly fiction

The silly fiction is not observing that this has already happened to twitter, facebook and reddit.

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

#628

Post by Karunamon »

babygoat wrote: post #562
Karunamon wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people say "freedom of speech" and they're not talking about a government entity, it's a pretty safe bet that they're talking about the principle enshrined in the first amendment, not the first amendment itself. Considering that The Internet as a whole is basically amounts to a whole lot of interconnected, other people's (back yards/restaurants/other poor analogies for physical spaces), saying "but the first doe…

> saying "but the first doesn't apply" is both willfully obtuse and missing the point. It's almost always a response to a person who seems to think that freedom of speech means they shouldn't have to face any consequences for the horrible things they say.

And this itself is a mischaracterization. The problem is that the rubric for "horrible things to say" has been extended so far as to cover usage of the word "retard".

Much like the rubric for "harassment" has been extended to cover simple incivility.

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

#629

Post by aerovistae »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #219
aerovistae wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but I believe that allowing even one idea to be banned from discourse is the first step towards a system where someone like Edward Snowden has to find asylum in Russia. I don't believe in censorship or hiding away what was really said or done. If anyone has a problem with this developer's language, they can boycott his repo.

Slurs aren't discourse, or even the start of discourse. And removing them has nothing to do with pervasive surveillance. > If anyone has a problem with this developer's language, they can boycott his repo. Github did, and they did. And then someone decided to stir up trouble by posting it as though people should be offended by what Github did, rather than applauding them. Github can do as they like on their own resou…

Slurs are part of discourse.

Slurs are considered a problem because they're offensive. Banning them is the first step on the road to banning offensive content.

Who arbitrates what is offensive? Sure, we can agree on "The N-Word", but how about Idiot's Guide to Web Tools?

Post reply on HN