7 ms·
I am not sure I understand your point about intent. I do agree that the OP did not intend to offend. My input to the Show HN is that I found the term juvenile a
by diskzero 5y ago
I am not sure I understand your point about intent. I do agree that the OP did not intend to offend. My input to the Show HN is that I found the term juvenile and offensive. The OP may choose to accept my advice or disregard it. I am not judging them, only providing some input.
Yes, people can choose to take offense at anything. There isn't much we can do about that. In my own interactions, there are certain words and phrases I choose not to use. This works for me, doesn't harm others and generally improves my quality of life.
We exist in a world of many intersecting values and beliefs. We navigate through them in differing ways. There is room for many differing points of view, although recent events make it seem like this is a less viable belief.
Back the the OP, this is a Show HN. My input is I think the name is lame.
I won't censor, down vote, blacklist or otherwise assign any other intent.
- grayhatter 5y agoMy response to yours was in the context of the original comment from redwoolf. I don't think you were virtue signaling, I do think redwoolf was. Your comments were very clear you're offering your view point. And I agree with you, it's a weak name that nearly any other option could improve. But you didn't go off on an unrelated tangent about an irrelevant separate context. The other commenter did go off on a tangent, and that's why they're catching flack. And why we're arguing about language instead of README's. The problem from my interpretation is 'blaming' OP for a context they're not trying to envoke.
- diskzero 5y agoGot it. I just wanted to make sure I didn't misunderstand you. This type of dialog is really valuable to me. As I stated elsewhere, something has happened in general that makes rational discussion difficult.