[erlang-questions] Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

[Fred Hebert]

On 02/13, Sashan Govender wrote:
>I think you just need to tolerate different cultures better. A word that is
>deemed racist in one culture isn't the same in another.
>

This is wrong. This is a classical bad argument that is related to the 
*paradox of intolerance*. Unless I am simply unaware of it, there is no 
English-speaking culture for which the word 'coon' (and not just 
'raccoon') is somehow a very important concept integral to their 
culture, such that not using it would be oppressive in some way.

In any case, the paradox of intolerance goes like this:

> Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we 
> extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are 
> not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the 
> intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with 
> them.

You can't just go and honestly try to make the argument that 
purposefully using a term that is deemed racist by most of the 
anglosphere is somehow cool and good because another unnamed culture 
probably sees no problem about it. How is that in any way reasonable?


>There are many other uses for coon.
>Maine Coon is a type of cat.
>Coon is type of cheese in Australia. Go on - tell all of Australia to stop
>eating coon.
>

The tool is called 'coon', not 'Maine coon', and it is not called 'coon 
(cheese)'. It's not called 'raccoon', and it does not have a single 
raccoon image. Instead you have commands like 'coon build', 'coon 
release', and a hosting site like 'coonhub'.

And that some cheese brand uses the name does not mean it's any decent 
idea for a programming tool.  What the hell of a kind of logic leap is 
that?  Are you unable to see context as worthwhile or to imagine that 
someone might think "this is the racist term" more easily than "this is 
clearly a reference to cheese"

This can't be anything but bad faith. This is not really the topic on 
which to argue as a sport.

>Next you'll be telling me to rethink the use of the work 'monkey' or
>'gorrilla' for a library. Where does it end?
>

It ends with respectfully not trying to piss off entire segments of the 
human race with shitty naming strategies that have very obvious racist 
overtones, as soon as you learn what their meaning is. Everyone is 
allowed to make mistakes, but if you double- and triple-down on it, you 
deserve the shitstorm coming your way from public backlash. Hands down.

I'm sorry that using racist terms is somehow integral to your 
appreciation of programming libraries, but *not* using racist terms is 
somehow integral to my appreciation of programming communities.

It seems we're in a quandary here, so I'll refer to the conclusion to 
the paradox of intolerance that follows the earlier quote: "We should 
therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the 
intolerant."

so gently piss off.