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

701–710 of 845 posts

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

#701

Post by rlidwka »

samch wrote: post #669
rlidwka wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 sayi…

I'll just have to admit to a difference of opinion with you on this. I believe there is something inherently wrong with the n-word. I took the time to seek out its etymological roots via the Oxford English Dictionary, and the earliest evidence of its use is entirely negative and demeaning to those being described as such. You don't need any additional context when the word itself was contrived as a convenient brush t…

> It is, to its very roots, a bad word.

Even if every single human being using it was meant to be insulting, it still wouldn't make it a bad word.

Because there are no bad words. Just like there are no bad numbers or bad colors or bad images. Information can't be good or bad. It has no such property.

A message becomes offensive only when its sender said it with the intention to be offensive. And the same message could be offensive in one case and not be offensive in others. Context matters.

> They are not trying to get people to say "r-word" instead of the r-word. They want people to be more thoughtful and stop using the term altogether.

It doesn't work like that. There will always be a word for mentally ill people. And there always will be some asshole who will try to use it against anybody who he doesn't like. Then it becomes derogatory. And it starts all over again.

They ("r-word campaign") will just change one word with another word (and burn a bunch of books containing the old word in the process). They will never change how people think.

Well, actually... you can remove all negative words from the language like it was suggested by George Orwell in 1984 novel [1]. Then "bad people" will have no words to express what they're thinking. But I really hope you aren't intending to go that way.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

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

#702

Post by rmxt »

sklogic wrote: post #686
rmxt wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One good instance of disingenuity deserves another: wait a second, I thought you said words couldn't cause harm!! It can't be harmful if I call you/Eich/Card a homophobe. He'll/They'll just have to get over it and deal with the repercussions themselves! How can you call the "just words" of what happened to Eich and Card a "shitstorm", but fail to see how "just words" can have a real, tangible impact on other people w…

Shitstorm was not just words - crybabies can cry whatever they want. But Eich got sacked, which is totally different. No retard was ever sacked for being called a retard. EDIT: clearly you're failing to notice a difference between calling names and calls to action. "Kill all cyclists" is a call to action, evil and, likely, illegal. "All cyclists are dimwits" is calling names, innocent and funny.

Fantastic, you've made the connection! You're continuing to perfectly illustrate two of the points that I've made regarding your hypocrisy:

- To paraphrase: "I only want to censor opinions when they disagree with the positions that I hold. It's not fair to call (x) a homophobe." (What happened to Eich was different than calling someone a potentially hurtful label. And, somehow it's OK to want to prohibit freedom in others when it comes to their rights (a la gay marriage), but it's not OK to lambaste someone else's opinion re: that topic.)

- "Eich got sacked." (Aha! Words often spur people on to action.)

Note: I don't take offense at every use of the word "retard," as much as you are attempting to lump those that disagree with you, like myself, into the "SJW" camp. I do think that it has little place in a professional setting, or even a casual setting where deeper discourse is the aim. Why intentionally use words that might cause others discomfort, when there are other words that won't cause discomfort but will express your point just as clearly?

I don't know if Github should have taken down the repo, but I don't think that disapproving of the use of the word "retarded" is unheard of. Calling someone a "retard" probably won't do irreparable harm to that person immediately, but it's minimally different than the sort of "bullying" of Eich/Card that you think is just such a travesty.

EDIT: We're talking across one another. I most certainly understand the difference between an explicit call to action, and "calling names." The argument that I'm making is that "calling names" often spurs people on to action, or encourages negative groupthink. Throwing around the word "retard" in a professional setting serves what purpose? I personally find little use for the word outside of extremely casual situations with people whom I am very familiar with. I don't know to what extent, if any, semi-professionally oriented hosting services should monitor their channels for potentially distasteful humor, but I think that's the question at hand re: Github's role.

To go back to your Eich/Card comparison, I don't think that what ended up happening to Eich is completely justified, but I do think that we can't prevent the Twitteratti or whomever from having opinions on public people. How can you disapprove of Github stepping in in this instance, while at the same time saying that the public at large should stifle their opinions regarding Eich/Card?

And, to add another layer of hypocrisy, how can you tacitly encourage opinions such as those of Eich/Card -- which are inherently stifling of the freedom of others to associate, and is a "hands-on" approach to the lives of others -- while saying that Github should take a "hands-off" role here when it comes to the use of language?

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

#703

Post by jazzyk »

DanBC wrote: post #391
ectoplasm wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're offended? So what. Not my problem, step away from the computer. Fortunately, you don't own GitHub.

The cognitive dissonance of people downvoting comments when they are complaining about censorship is baffling. The hypocrisy is weird.

>"Fortunately, you don't own GitHub."

The above comment was downvoted (not by me) because it does not contribute anything to the discussion (everyone knows he does not own Github)

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

#704

Post by kefka »

smrtinsert wrote: post #700
kefka wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's going on at Github is rather perverse. And it happens to be around the word "Meritocracy". Because of the "feels", the word meritocracy is a 'disempowering word'. It makes people with less skill feel 'less valuable'. So the impetus is to raise your skill? No. It's to devalue others who call you on it, or disregard your uninformed opinion. What this accumulates to is the Github rug in the headquarters. "The Uni…

So when you have a request to the remove the word "retard" from a repo, and that request is complied with, feminism is to blame. Got it!

Because in the case of GitHub censorship, it really is feminism and social justice warrior garbage.

But I might be a white (-3 points) guy (-2 points) so you have to balance that in with the cited facts about the rug. I think it's pretty clear.

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

#705

Post by jazzyk »

palmer_eldritch wrote: post #461
DanBC wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cognitive dissonance of people downvoting comments when they are complaining about censorship is baffling. The hypocrisy is weird.

Downvoting isn't equal to censorship. The content remains available for anyone with an account. The commit history of this project remains available too... however, they forbid the authors to use the word in the live version if they want their project to be hosted on github. Now, I guess it's their prerogative to set the rules for people using their service. But I think it's also fair to say that being the facebook o…

Down-voting can be used as censorship, if not used properly. As in downvoting because you don't agree with the opinion, rather than because the post is irrelevant, ad-hominem, or content-free. If you don't agree, post a rebuttal.

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

#706

Post by dragonwriter »

rlidwka wrote: post #701
samch wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just have to admit to a difference of opinion with you on this. I believe there is something inherently wrong with the n-word. I took the time to seek out its etymological roots via the Oxford English Dictionary, and the earliest evidence of its use is entirely negative and demeaning to those being described as such. You don't need any additional context when the word itself was contrived as a convenient brush t…

> It is, to its very roots, a bad word. Even if every single human being using it was meant to be insulting, it still wouldn't make it a bad word. Because there are no bad words. Just like there are no bad numbers or bad colors or bad images. Information can't be good or bad. It has no such property. A message becomes offensive only when its sender said it with the intention to be offensive. And the same message coul…

> Well, actually... you can remove all negative words from the language like it was suggested by George Orwell in 1984 novel [1]. Then "bad people" will have no words to express what they're thinking.

The idea that that works seems to depend on linguistic determinism, which is far from established.

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

#707

Post by samch »

rlidwka wrote: post #701
samch wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just have to admit to a difference of opinion with you on this. I believe there is something inherently wrong with the n-word. I took the time to seek out its etymological roots via the Oxford English Dictionary, and the earliest evidence of its use is entirely negative and demeaning to those being described as such. You don't need any additional context when the word itself was contrived as a convenient brush t…

> It is, to its very roots, a bad word. Even if every single human being using it was meant to be insulting, it still wouldn't make it a bad word. Because there are no bad words. Just like there are no bad numbers or bad colors or bad images. Information can't be good or bad. It has no such property. A message becomes offensive only when its sender said it with the intention to be offensive. And the same message coul…

Wow, I'm hoping you misspoke here, but I'm a bit concerned by the way you confused people who are "mentally ill" with those who have intellectual disabilities.

Also, this line is dangerously incorrect: "A message becomes offensive only when its sender said it with the intention to be offensive."

If you've ever taken respectful workplace training in the US, you've likely learned the difference between intent and impact. What matters, in the US at least, is the impact of the message, not the intent of the person speaking [1].

1. https://www.google.com/search?q=sexual+harrassment+law+inent...

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

#708

Post by bduerst »

makomk wrote: post #372
bduerst wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Free Speech" isn't a blank check to say and do whatever you want. Even SCOTUS says that direct threats of violence aren't protected by the first amendment. I'm tired of reading people nebulously defining "free speech philosophies" online to act as a shield to justify nefarious behavior on private property. Free speech exists as a protection from government censorship, and it doesn't protect you for acting like a dic…

Defending your position by citing that comic is basically the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling argument you can make for GitHub's actions is that they weren't illegal. (For anyone who doesn't get the reference, look at the hovertext on that xkcd.)

I wasn't citing the comic, I said it was a summation.

The SCOTUS example points out that the people whose jobs are to interpret free speech say it is limited, and that claiming "free speech" a blank check to escape consequences is merely semantics to support a bias.

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

#709

Post by 1stranger »

nols wrote: post #698
kenrikm wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stupid, Git, Retard, Idiot, Dimwit etc.. In the context they are used all have very similar intentions to put someone down for not being smart. There is one really important point to keep in mind, when someone is offended about something someone else says or writes that is their decision and it is their problem not the one who did the offending. I personally don't generally use the term "retard" I also don't generall…

No, they really don't. Retard has historically been used to classify the mentally disabled, it literally was a definition. Using it to call someone mentally disabled as an insult is more offensive to the mentally disabled than calling someone stupid. That's the issue. You're free to use retard in your code as much as you want, apparently not on Github though. They, as a private company, are allowed to pick and choose…

Idiot has been historically used to mean a mentally disabled person:

> idiot: MEDICINE (archaic): a mentally handicapped person.

Google "euphemism treadmill" for more info.

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

#710

Post by shkkmo »

kefka wrote: post #665
shkkmo wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feminism is not to blame. Feminism is wonderful and empowering ideology. There is a distinct difference between the ideology of feminism and the behavior of a specific group of feminists. Lumping the two together like that is like blaming Islam for terrorists.

Feminism, by its very name, is a sexist philosophy. And according to feminists, sexism (mainly patriarchy) is bad. Unless it's feminism. Feminism -> Feminine -> Female Definition of -ism: a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.

> Feminism, by its very name, is a sexist philosophy. And according to feminists, sexism (mainly patriarchy) is bad. Unless it's feminism.

That seems to imply that you don't think sexism is bad. Did you mean to imply that?

Feminism, is by definition, anti-sexist. There are sexists who claim to be feminists, but that doesn't change the meaning of the word.

While the term 'feminism' does come from the root 'feminine', it refers to an umbrella of ideologies that includes many advocates of equal rights for men as well as for women.

However, if you do believe in the value of sexism, I can definitely understand why you would dislike feminism.

Post reply on HN