On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:54:11PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:34:23PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
…The solution, of course, is to stop subsidizing bad behavior.
Those who would subsidize bad behaviour, create safe spaces for the melting snowflakes, remove the need for "trigger warnings" and otherwise subsidize the cry bullies, are rife within the ranks of our "modern" "Western" "culture":
https://lwn.net/Articles/753646/
Sad days...
Wait a second. You are saying you can assume someone is agreeing with you, if they don't respond?
It's called "tacit agreement" - yes, it's agreement by default - it is an effective (whether intentional or not) surrender to the "vocal majority" even though that vocal majority may be an absolute or relative minority.
But, in a public forum (or "modern democracy") tacit consent also implies a high likelihood of the tyranny of the minority - i.e. those who squawk the loudest get to "win" (or get the government benefits, etc).
Those who seek "safe spaces" (whatever the hell they are) are also called cry-bullies.
The SJWs or "social justice warriors" who actively "create safe spaces" by for example (to pick a totally random example) removing a short yet politically incorrect joke from documentation, are often engaged in some level of "white knighting" or virtue signaling and in any case are subsidizing bad behaviour.
Now, what could also arguably be alleged as the "bad behaviour" of a politically incorrect joke, is also a healthy poke in the ribs of the cry bullies, those trigger-ready snowflakes who self proclaim to melt at the sight of any of a million trigger words - and by publishing their melting quality far and wide, publicly and loudly, they are bullying the rest of us.
We owe it to our dignity to NOT surrender our freedom of speech or our "freedom to trigger" in our public, work and play spaces, to the dictates of the covert passive aggressive cry bullies.
And remember folks, EVERYTHING we say, all our speech, is effectively political in some way. Those who remove a short yet politically-incorrect joke from documentation are making a political statement, doing a political action, saying "this is a safe space for cry bullies, you will not pollute our safe space with politically incorrect jokes", even though it is (usually) in the guise of "we want no politics in our docs".
See also:
https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2018-May/0...
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-28/are-social-just...
Good luck,
Both. RMS should not make political decisions for glibc anymore, and it is not right for him to seek “integrity of the prose he wrote” (where said “prose” is a bad joke completely disconnected from the rest of the manual).
Yes, many seek to remove any concept of morals (or even ethics), to remove any hint of the founder's original intentions, to remove all politically incorrect prose and the ever-expanding menagerie of trigger words and phrases from all "upstanding and upright" technical material such as documentation. Let us all submit to the passive aggressive, cry bully trigger-melting "unique snowflakes" by making the entire public world a safe space. Or, let's not‼ Let's honour the intentions, ethics, vision and grace of the founders on whose shoulders we stand (such as Richard Stallman). Let's admit that we are above submission to an endless march of passive aggressive cry bullies demanding the entire world become their safe space. Let's admit that everything we say and do is in some way, on some level political, and at the very least honour the intentions of the founders of those projects we benefit so handsomely from. Do. Not. Subsidize. Bad. Behaviour. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-28/are-social-justice-warriors-snowfl... And do not subsidize the passive aggressive safe-space demanding cry bullies. ... To paraphrase you: "The work to avoid offending the various categories of snowflake safe-space-junkies, can be a real cost, can be significant, is a detriment, and the chilling effect this all has is real." THAT is the reason this particular joke (by RMS) should stay in the glibc manual. "The triggered" and "the oppressed" are redefining permissible speech - which is ironically apropos RMS' original joke. The redefinition of allowed speech is dangerous and literally tyrannical in the underlying intent of doing so (whether conscious, or unconscious) - refer Dr Jordan Peterson who puts this exact point so succinctly. Create your world,