211–220 of 444 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep seeing this notion that the singular they is offensive. I thought its whole purpose was to be more inclusive. At what point did it become offensive and why is it considered to be offensive?
It's not. People are having a hard time adjusting and overreacting. It's only a problem if you using singular they specifically and only for trans folk, ie singling them out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This essay would be harshly criticized if it was written today. It still might be someday.
Why do you say that?
That's what you get when you let ideology become more important than the core of the product.
This is only the beginning of the downfall.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But my experience of the site (as an experienced long time user) is much more negatively affected by the “active moderation” than it is positively affected by it. I’d rather have ten duplicate questions for every question, than a race to ninja-downvote or close anything that is tangentially related to an existing question. The struggle to maintain quality in the content of the site appears to be destroying the qualit…
> I’d rather have ten duplicate questions for every question Sure, unless it really happens. I'd been burned by over-moderation as well but when I look at the process I think it's not arbitrary. There are controls and voting by more than one person. Remember, there is nothing a moderator gains by doing any of this.
But I think this recipe is a disaster: users downvote and close-vote. Moderators look at votes and clean up accordingly. I think the problem is that the algorithms allow a small group of drive-by downvoters to destroy the experience. I'd be more than willing to accept a somewhat lower content quality for a more friendly experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
except this is a code example on the site im not going to write bob and alice and then worry about "well what if these fake people in this example i made up are actually trans" lol give me a break.
Agreed. If you're the author and Alice and Bob are the imaginary characters in your example, then you get to decide their gender. Same as an author who is writing a novel, is free to invent characters and assign gender, sexual orientation, and any other character traits they want. It's your story, they are your characters. You decide if it's a he, she, xe, or whatever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
its just posts on the site not real people. chill. you need to realize context and not get all offended and when you let someone control what you can and cant say because of their feelings its gonna be a bad time. california is already eating itself. is that really what you want?
There are already all sorts of controls over what people can and can't say in professional settings. You can't use the N-word or keep asking someone out after they've said no in a workplace environment. These controls exist for reasons that should be obvious with a moment of thought. This is different from a public space where the rules are more relaxed (but there are still some controls). And you're welcome to be as…
guess what, rules against what you cant say are fine but you cant make me have say something. thats tyranny. youre welcome to be as outraged as you want in your own home but you dont get to control my life because of it. its called freedom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
its just posts on the site not real people. chill. you need to realize context and not get all offended and when you let someone control what you can and cant say because of their feelings its gonna be a bad time. california is already eating itself. is that really what you want?
None of this is about posts involving hypothetical people (like Alice&Bob in cryptography examples). You're the only one who thinks that. The topic is about when a real user asks that they be referred to with specific pronouns, and other people instead refer to them with different pronouns or avoid using gendered pronouns. This whole conversation is about real people.
but this is about editing posts to be gender neutral. why do we need to do that? if YOU dont have a specific pronoun then whats the problem?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep seeing this notion that the singular they is offensive. I thought its whole purpose was to be more inclusive. At what point did it become offensive and why is it considered to be offensive?
It's not. People are having a hard time adjusting and overreacting. It's only a problem if you using singular they specifically and only for trans folk, ie singling them out.
This isn't about singling anybody out with pronouns.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. If you're the author and Alice and Bob are the imaginary characters in your example, then you get to decide their gender. Same as an author who is writing a novel, is free to invent characters and assign gender, sexual orientation, and any other character traits they want. It's your story, they are your characters. You decide if it's a he, she, xe, or whatever.
You certainly haven't been keeping up with Twitter culture if you think this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who answers quite a few quesitons on SO I'd really like to see posts that were perceived as wrongfully closed to see if I agree (haha) and also to see how to fix the system. Of course I have no hope that S.O. will change anything. When they started their "be nice" campaign I suggested the "CLOSED: This is a duplicate" message should be changed to "CONGRATS: This appears to be a duplicates so you win! There…
> I see lots of volunteers answering questions and only voting to close the bad ones and they are bad ones. Before answering questions in future give them a bit of a Googling. Find the ones someone like yourself didnt spend time on, the ones that instantly got closed as off topic or duplicate or moderator was grumpy today so closed. I get it, wealth of free information and that, sure. But these are the top results in…