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

Tue Feb 13 00:51:32 CET 2018

Identifiers matter. They tell the world a lot about how something is
perceived. Naming can get awfully hard, *depending on the reach* - what
might work really well in rural Alabama might not work so well in San
Francisco (and vice-versa). If you're in Branding, and don't have  ADL
database
<https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols?cat_id[147]=147>
auto-completing
in your URL-bar, you're not going to get very far.

Intent matters. Of course it does. Maybe you *want* to appeal to racists
and nationalists - I mean, its' working quite well as a strategy in quite a
bit of the world these days. On the other hand, if you *don't*, and someone
points out to you that your choice of words may not be the wisest choice,
well, you might want to reconsider it (•). Note that the point here isn't
"people shouldn't be offended". People *are* offended, and thats about all
that matters - remember, this is about the marketing aspects of naming.

Empathy matters. Put yourself in somebody else's shoes - and ask yourself
how they might feel about your actions. Not how they *should* feel, but how
they might *actually* feel.

Privilege matters. I grew up as a Brahmin, in India. It's been a *long* while
- 30 years - since the default privilege that comes from that upbringing
has been useful, but even now, when I end up on the receiving end of
stop-and-frisked, being brown in the wrong place, casual and explicit
racist invective, and the works, I fall back on that privilege. It's not an
explicit thing - it's having been part of an entire culture where being
brahmin means I'm better than *those people*.

Employee retention matters. I spend a lot of time, energy, and yes, money,
in getting people up to speed, developing trust in each other, and working
cohesively as a team. It's a delicate thing, this balance, and the last
thing I need is casual racism or gender-issues into the mix.

Cheers

(•) In the 70s, I pretty freely using the n-word. I grew up in a fairly
disconnected part of India at the time (Kanpur), and we, literally, did not
know (and heck, hadn't ever seen) any african-americans - and about the
only context around this we had was some spectacularly racist faux-westerns
by an author named J.T.Edson. Fast-forward a few years, to my
graduate-school days in the U.S at Notre Dame, and my (pretty rapid)
discovery that, well, I probably shouldn't.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Roman Galeev <jamhedd@REDACTED> wrote:

> The worst part of it that nobody is offended at this very moment, but Fred
> speaks for people who could be offended, in his opinion. But could they, or
> could they not nobody knows (except them, but they are not present). Maybe
> the same people could be offended by other words as well, how do we know?
> And should we really care (having quite offensive names in the wild
> already)? Should we run all possible project names through the council of
> these people?
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Zachary Kessin <zkessin@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>> I would like to second what Fred said. I just went through
>> something like this in a different context and I have to say "its not
>> reasonable that <Group> is offended" is a pretty bad apology.
>> ᐧ
>>
>> Zach Kessin - CEO Finch Software
>> I boost sales with retail chatbots for fashion and cosmetics
>> +972 54 234 3956 <+972%2054-234-3956> / +44 203 734 9790
>> <+44%2020%203734%209790> / +1 617 778 7213 <(617)%20778-7213>
>> Book a meeting with me <https://calendly.com/zkessin/chatbot>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Fred Hebert <mononcqc@REDACTED> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:29 AM, <zxq9@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2018年2月12日月曜日 10時16分51秒 JST Fred Hebert wrote:
>>>> > Intent does not matter.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Fred, I have enormous respect for you and have gone several rounds with
>>>> you on several subjects, each time having learned something for my own
>>>> part. On technical subjects, anyway.
>>>>
>>>> But... INTENT
>>>>
>>>> You are demonstraby wrong already. Just stop. You will not win against
>>>> the weight of history.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am not wrong in not wanting to ever introduce this library in my god
>>> damn workplace. Because I know and have worked with people who do find this
>>> kind of shit offensive.
>>>
>>> I'm happy you live in a place and in a context where everyone is fine
>>> with that. This has not been the reality of the people I have spent time
>>> with both professionally and personally.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is becoming some SJW ridiculousness already, not because you care
>>>> about that but because of the ambient temperature. I know SJW flippancy is
>>>> not your intent, but that is the only place this winds up going these days.
>>>> That is not a small failure -- it quickly becomes a systemic one, not just
>>>> in a concurrent software system of ephemeral importance, but a concrete
>>>> socio-economic one of critical importance that pays for all the other
>>>> parties we enjoy.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm surprised that you find the idea that using a term that can very
>>> reasonably be construed as racist is *SJW flippancy*.
>>>
>>> Let's take a quick look by looking at first definitions on Urban
>>> Dictionary for a game. I picked random animal names or short terms:
>>>
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=coon
>>>    Insulting term for a black person
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=doggo
>>>    An alternate term for a dog used on meme pages to express the
>>>    meaning of the picture. Usually found in captions.
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Cat
>>>    The definitive pet.
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dog
>>>    Not a cat
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fox
>>>    A beautiful and attractive woman
>>>    - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whale
>>>    noun; a wealthy patron to a casino, gets paid special attention by a
>>>    casino host so the patron will feel comfortable to gamble more money.
>>>
>>>  Oh hm. Sorry I guess the usage is really forgotten for that one.
>>>
>>> *Intent does not matter* is not me saying that the author of the lib is
>>> racist or ill-intended. It's me saying that no matter the original intent,
>>> the consequences will be the result of the reader's interpretation. Look
>>> this is even a principle in literary review called *The death of the
>>> author* (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_the_Author):
>>>
>>> In his essay, Barthes argues against the method of reading and criticism
>>>> that relies on aspects of the author's identity—their political views,
>>>> historical context, religion, ethnicity, psychology, or other biographical
>>>> or personal attributes—to distill meaning from the author's work. In this
>>>> type of criticism, the experiences and biases of the author serve as a
>>>> definitive "explanation" of the text. For Barthes, this method of reading
>>>> may be apparently tidy and convenient but is actually sloppy and flawed:
>>>> "To give a text an author" and assign a single, corresponding
>>>> interpretation to it "is to impose a limit on that text".
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> In a well-known quotation, Barthes draws an analogy between text and
>>>> textiles, declaring that a "text is a tissue [or fabric] of quotations",
>>>> drawn from "innumerable centers of culture", rather than from one,
>>>> individual experience. The essential meaning of a work depends on the
>>>> impressions of the reader, rather than the "passions" or "tastes" of the
>>>> writer; "a text's unity lies not in its origins", or its creator, "but in
>>>> its destination", or its audience.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The whole point is that you cannot reasonably expect the author to be
>>> around to give meaning and maintain these things. What the author intends
>>> is not relevant in the long run because the interpretation can get away
>>> from it. It's like in satire: good satire/irony/sarcasm must be visible and
>>> enough in your face that it won't be construed as supporting the system you
>>> are attempting to criticize.
>>>
>>> Intent does not matter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Riddle me this:
>>>> If we cannot undersand enough about the software systems that WE WRITE
>>>> OURSELVES that we need the "let it crash" mentality, how is it that we
>>>> somehow understand to a manifest degree the economic and social value
>>>> systems (which are profoundly more complex than our petty software systems)
>>>> that we can dictate value within them? By what restart mechanism is this
>>>> all brought back to a "reasonble default"?
>>>>
>>>> I am sincerely desirous of an answer here, because I have a profound
>>>> respect for your intellect but cannot imagine that you have properly
>>>> considered the alternatives or where this path of discourse winds up
>>>> eventualy going.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I very much stand by *intent does not matter*. It matters to me in this
>>> context and I do not yet judge Valery negatively, I trust that *raccoon*
>>> was indeed the original name intent. It does not mean that other people
>>> will do the same. Expecting other people to do the same is downright absurd
>>> and foolish. If your entire position relies on explaining every single
>>> person the origin of the name for things to go well, you have taken the
>>> losing battle of tilting at windmills. This is the hill you die on. What
>>> I'm doing here is giving a really fucking serious warning of how much
>>> windmill tilting you'll get into.
>>>
>>> If you want me to go by the *Let it Crash* maxim, the idea of *let it
>>> crash* is to not try to handle all the errors and letting them fail
>>> early and often. Start from a clean slate rather than trying to correct
>>> corrupted state. What I'm doing here is trying to crash this stupid ass
>>> project name as early as possible so the author doesn't get stuck trying to
>>> handle every error coming their way in the near future. Look at it this
>>> way. You even have a bunch of terms for it in this single thread: *SJW
>>> Flippancy.* Loic brought up *identity politics*. Roman is trying make a
>>> tally of who is it who's offended in the first place as if that made any
>>> difference the moment this gets out of here.
>>>
>>> If you can't see that as a warning sign when this discussion is taking
>>> place within mailing list regulars, what will be a reasonable waning sign
>>> to you?
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> With best regards,
>      Roman Galeev,
>      +420 702 817 968 <+420%20702%20817%20968>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>

-- 

*Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
<http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/204a87f81a0d9764c1f3364f53e8facf.png>That
tall bald Indian guy..*
*Twitter <https://twitter.com/dieswaytoofast> | Blog
<http://dieswaytoofast.blogspot.com/> | G+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/108074935470209044442/posts> | LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/dieswaytoofast>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20180213/e9f6ee53/attachment.htm>