Subject: Re: [boost] [OFF] Inclusive language (Was: [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10)
From: VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira (vini.ipsmaker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-18 17:37:19
2017-07-17 12:31 GMT+02:00 David Sankel <camior_at_[hidden]>:
> My interested is in communicating technical opinion, and, without judging
> positively or negatively those with sensitivities, I acknowledge that
> communication is more effective when it isn't sidetracked by discussions of
> how offensive the wording is.
You look well intentioned, but I cannot not ignore how âprayâ you've fallen
for these tricks.
Your view ignores two crucial facts.
The first fact is: âcommunication is more effective when it isn't
sidetracked by discussions of how offensive the wording isâ. Well... this
was **my** complaint to begin with. It wasn't me who suddenly promoted the
âSJW's cabinet of acceptable opinionâ ways with a âthis language is
Second fact is: You either agree with this bullshit or you're against it.
You obviously didn't raise voice when this bullshit began here, but you're
now trying to make piece and pragmatic and all else. This only shows you're
If you stay quiet when the SJW paradise promoters push their agenda but
voice about being understandable and teach how to comply with this
censorship in the opposite scenario, the result will be very obvious. Do I
really need to spell the result?
A friendly reminder of what you do not oppose to:
the part I was most disappointed in was that, for many, the content of the
> talk was overshadowed by the political controversy.
I'd use the label scary, not sad. Even technical lists of people who
*solve* actual issues are now being infested by this plague. It used to be
in social âsciencesâ only.
 These are facts, not opinions.
-- VinÃcius dos Santos Oliveira https://vinipsmaker.github.io/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk