www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Appropriateness of posts

reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some locker room jokes 
that continued even after I asked it be stopped. Perhaps what I wrote was 
missed, so I'm elevating this to its own thread.

Please regard this forum as a professional work environment as to 
appropriateness of postings.

If it's inappropriate for mixed company or children, it's not appropriate here. 
Remember that we draw from a worldwide audience, and absolutely everyone 
interested in D is welcome here.
Mar 16 2014
next sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


Where? Any specific threads?
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 09:18:43 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some 
 locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


 Where? Any specific threads?


I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "sclytrack" <sclytrack sorry.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:31:54 UTC, Namespace wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 09:18:43 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some 
 locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


 Where? Any specific threads?


 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


	**xy.com in one of my fake e-mail addresses
	as supposed to my usual  fake.com

	I use the web forum so e-mail is not
	really visible to me.

	Seems like Walter wants it seriously
	professional. No joking around about D.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

      Seems like Walter wants it seriously
      professional. No joking around about D.


Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a professional work 
environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. This shouldn't be a mystery.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:09:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

     Seems like Walter wants it seriously
     professional. No joking around about D.


 Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a 
 professional work environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. 
 This shouldn't be a mystery.


Appropriateness of a joke is purely defined by a culture and is 
completely subjective. It is perfectly fine to define your own 
rules on your forum. Trying to appeal to some common morale as a 
basis for that is not.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:18:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:09:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

    Seems like Walter wants it seriously
    professional. No joking around about D.


 Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a 
 professional work environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. 
 This shouldn't be a mystery.


 Appropriateness of a joke is purely defined by a culture and is 
 completely subjective. It is perfectly fine to define your own 
 rules on your forum. Trying to appeal to some common morale as 
 a basis for that is not.


+1

As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive to 
someone, somewhere.
You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a 
very homogenous group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of 
collaborators and users spanning the entire globe, an age range 
of 60+ years and a wide variety of religious/cultural/political 
views and environments.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 11:49 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive to someone,
 somewhere.
 You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a very homogenous
 group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of collaborators and users spanning
 the entire globe, an age range of 60+ years and a wide variety of
 religious/cultural/political views and environments.


Exercising good judgement and common sense is all I ask.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:04:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:49 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive 
 to someone,
 somewhere.
 You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a 
 very homogenous
 group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of collaborators 
 and users spanning
 the entire globe, an age range of 60+ years and a wide variety 
 of
 religious/cultural/political views and environments.


 Exercising good judgement and common sense is all I ask.


Of course, and I don't have a problem with this*. I was just 
pointing out that in today's global communities, people within 
said communities will have very different definitions of common 
sense / good judgement / appropriate etc....

*both in intention and understanding.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:04:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 Exercising good judgement and common sense is all I ask.


By my common sense and good judgement that thread was perfectly 
OK and I am honestly offended by the fact that someone does not 
consider my cultural preferences normal in that regard. However, 
I do understand that it was not your intention and take it easy, 
as should anyone feeling offended in the internet.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "bachmeier" <no spam.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:49:07 UTC, John Colvin wrote:


 As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive 
 to someone, somewhere.
 You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a 
 very homogenous group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of 
 collaborators and users spanning the entire globe, an age range 
 of 60+ years and a wide variety of religious/cultural/political 
 views and environments.


I don't see much room for controversy if discussions focus on D.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/17/14, 11:49 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:18:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:09:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

    Seems like Walter wants it seriously
    professional. No joking around about D.


 Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a
 professional work environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. This
 shouldn't be a mystery.


 Appropriateness of a joke is purely defined by a culture and is
 completely subjective. It is perfectly fine to define your own rules
 on your forum. Trying to appeal to some common morale as a basis for
 that is not.


 +1

 As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive to
 someone, somewhere.


Heh, case in point - there was a gentleman going by "Ramon" at a point 
in this forum who flew off the handle taking offense at something I said 
(no idea what exactly that was).


 You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a very
 homogenous group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of collaborators
 and users spanning the entire globe, an age range of 60+ years and a
 wide variety of religious/cultural/political views and environments.


One can argue that it's all relative but that's rather ineffective. The 
reality is I do work at Facebook with people from all over the globe and 
though cultural adaptation is on rare occasions an issue, it's never 
been considered inapproachable or even difficult.

That said, I don't think it's time to establish community guidelines 
etc. although at some point larger participation might create a need.


Andrei
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:01:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 One can argue that it's all relative but that's rather 
 ineffective. The reality is I do work at Facebook with people 
 from all over the globe and though cultural adaptation is on 
 rare occasions an issue, it's never been considered 
 inapproachable or even difficult.


So basically everybody adapts to american broadcast standards?

A fun book: The Hidden Dimension by Edward T. Hall
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:13:06 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 So basically everybody adapts to american broadcast standards?

 A fun book: The Hidden Dimension by Edward T. Hall


You come to country, you accept its culture. It is expected 
attitude.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:14:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 You come to country, you accept its culture. It is expected 
 attitude.


I don't see your point. That only work on a very superficial 
level.

You cannot expect a chinese girl to appreciate being kissed on 
the street by her boyfriend, even if she moves to Europe.
Mar 17 2014
parent 1100110 <0b1100110 gmail.com> writes:
On 3/17/14, 16:50, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:14:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 You come to country, you accept its culture. It is expected attitude.


 I don't see your point. That only work on a very superficial level.

 You cannot expect a chinese girl to appreciate being kissed on the
 street by her boyfriend, even if she moves to Europe.



No, but you can expect her not to freak out if other people are doing it.
Mar 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 5:14 PM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:13:06 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

 So basically everybody adapts to american broadcast standards?


 You come to country, you accept its culture. It is expected attitude.


American broadcast standards have nothing to do with american culture, 
they're famously disconnected. That's the problem with them and (I 
assume) what Ola was pointing out: Try not to offend anyone (as the FCC 
implicitly forces broadcasters to do), and you're automatically adopting 
the sub-culture of the craziest, biggest knee-jerkers in existence, no 
matter how uncommon and non-representative their "get offended any 
anything and everything" actually is.

Personally I'm offended by knee-jerk ethics (I'm not being coy about 
that, I really do find it highly offensive), which throws the whole idea 
of not offending anyone right out the window.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:12:14 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 American broadcast standards have nothing to do with american 
 culture, they're famously disconnected. That's the problem with 
 them and (I assume) what Ola was pointing out: Try not to 
 offend anyone (as the FCC implicitly forces broadcasters to


Sort of. The only shared knowledge foreigners have of US norms is 
what the see on TV. Unfortunately it affects culture too. Even 
here in Norway I see regressions related to the (naked) human 
body among some young people, which probably is caused by more TV 
series being american (cheaper production).

I personally take offence that someone would tell a woman that 
breastfeeding in public or at work would be unacceptable. It is 
completely natural and should be allowed anywhere. Babie's needs 
first. Yet, you'll find someone object to it, not because they 
personally find it offensive ( who would? ), but because of some 
odd unhealthy norm. The only way to move that norm is to actually 
breastfeed in public.

Who is the jerk? The woman breast feeding at work during lunch, 
or the person telling her that it is unprofessional and direct 
her to do it behind closed doors?

What is more politically correct?


 do), and you're automatically adopting the sub-culture of the 
 craziest, biggest knee-jerkers in existence, no matter how 
 uncommon and non-representative their "get offended any 
 anything and everything" actually is.


I think it is OK to say that you are PERSONALLY offended. What is 
not OK is to censor others because some unknown entity might be 
offended. Deleting or closing the .sexy thread for being 
off-topic is quite ok though.


 Personally I'm offended by knee-jerk ethics (I'm not being coy 
 about that, I really do find it highly offensive), which throws 
 the whole idea of not offending anyone right out the window.


:-)

I was once told not to bring up politics (George Bush) in casual 
game chat by a US player, because it might be taken as offensive 
by someone. I found that shocking.

I was once told in game chat by a US player that I could not use 
the term "shit" because it was such an offensive word. I was 
surprised. In scandinavia the word is so mild it basically means 
"ouch", it can even have positive connotations "skitbra" == "shit 
good" (really good).
Mar 17 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/18/2014 2:59 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 I was once told not to bring up politics (George Bush) in casual game
 chat by a US player, because it might be taken as offensive by someone.
 I found that shocking.


I think the issue there probably isn't so much "offense", but the fact 
that american discussion of politics is notoriously volatile, and in a 
mixed-group is pretty much guaranteed to erupt in a flame war.


 I was once told in game chat by a US player that I could not use the
 term "shit" because it was such an offensive word. I was surprised. In
 scandinavia the word is so mild it basically means "ouch", it can even
 have positive connotations "skitbra" == "shit good" (really good).


That mildness of "shit" is true of probably around half of americans, 
too. Especially among the "Gen X" generation and younger (and of course 
there's varying regional tendencies, too). For a LOT of us it's just 
seen as a more normal and less Disney-ish way to say "ouch", "oops" or 
"stuff". But then, the US was also home to Puritanism way back when, so 
there's still a lot of those intolerance-disguised-as-ethics attitudes too.

Considering "shit" to be offensive enough to be banned is fairly 
uncommon in the US, except for grade school/high school employees and 
certain specific regional pockets known for being extremely conservative.

An example of the US's extreme duality with ethics:

When the Super Bowl had that Janet Jackson "incident", it's true that a 
sizable chunk of the country went into a crazed puritanical "the sky is 
falling" frenzy. But there were also just as many americans who were 
pretty much with the rest of the world: "Uhh, what's the big deal?" 
Personally, I think it's positively bonkers to worry about kids being 
scarred by seeing something they themselves used to suck on, but whatever.
Mar 18 2014
next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/18/2014 9:05 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/18/2014 2:59 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
 <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 I was once told in game chat by a US player that I could not use the
 term "shit" because it was such an offensive word. I was surprised. In
 scandinavia the word is so mild it basically means "ouch", it can even
 have positive connotations "skitbra" == "shit good" (really good).


 That mildness of "shit" is true of probably around half of americans,
 too. Especially among the "Gen X" generation and younger (and of course
 there's varying regional tendencies, too). For a LOT of us it's just
 seen as a more normal and less Disney-ish way to say "ouch", "oops" or
 "stuff". But then, the US was also home to Puritanism way back when, so
 there's still a lot of those intolerance-disguised-as-ethics attitudes too.


Oh, yea, and "shit" can have positive connotations here in the US, too, 
particularly in informal speech: "Oh, MAN that burger was some good shit!"

It's very much a wildcard word, really. Like "smurf" ;)
Mar 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Tuesday, 18 March 2014 at 13:05:31 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I think the issue there probably isn't so much "offense", but 
 the fact that american discussion of politics is notoriously 
 volatile, and in a mixed-group is pretty much guaranteed to 
 erupt in a flame war.


Well, it was right after his re-election and the person who told 
me not to talk about it agreed with my sentiments, and nobody 
complained about it either. This was on closed guild chat. It was 
a case of "somebody might be upset" where nobody actually was 
upset.


 That mildness of "shit" is true of probably around half of 
 americans, too.


Yes, again nobody was upset, it was a case of "somebody might get 
upset".  I actually don't consider "shit" to be cussing at all. 
:-)

I keep reading comments from people on the net claiming that 
Linus Thorvalds is acting like a jerk, but I've never seen a 
comment from anyone from northern Europe suggesting it.


 Disney-ish way to say "ouch", "oops" or "stuff". But then, the 
 US was also home to Puritanism way back when, so there's still 
 a lot of those intolerance-disguised-as-ethics attitudes too.


Yes, but it goes deeper I think. Because we are getting more of 
it in my country after we got  immigrants (a fairly recent 
phenomon). E.g. the neutral term for a black person in Africa was 
"neger" (no negative connotations, but a bit exotic and 
interesting), while the insulting version was "svarting" 
(blackish). Then the immigrants took offence at the neutral term 
because they associated it with "nigger" and didn't want to be 
associated with tribal Africa, so now the neutral version is 
taboo and many children books have to be scrapped (books that are 
describing tribal Africa in terms that aren't racist).

So, with more "sensitive issues" beneath the surface you get more 
of the superficial politeness. In the US that has been going on 
since the early days when various religious groups fled from 
Europe. BUT, some people in the US that has not really been much 
outside the US thinks that this level of surface-level politeness 
is meant to be universal and global.

However, I am upset about the widespread US term "caucasian", not 
because it is a bad word, but because of the Aryan connotations 
that has some seriously bad vibes to it after 2WW and the nazi 
worship of "scandinavian genes".

The term "caucasian" is incredibly bad taste, and I find it 
offensive. I cringe when I cross off "caucasian" on US papers. It 
is if I am forced to declare myself Aryan.


 the world: "Uhh, what's the big deal?" Personally, I think it's 
 positively bonkers to worry about kids being scarred by seeing 
 something they themselves used to suck on, but whatever.


Actually kids are more scarred by being told that such things are 
taboo. Being relaxed about the human body of others is a good 
path to feeling good about your own body.

What is worse: higher rape rate is tied to cultures that make sex 
and nudity taboo than cultures that are more relaxed... (rape 
becomes a more potent source of power and control if sex and 
nudity is a big deal).

(Again, just about all american I've met has expressed that they 
have no problems with nudity themselves, and I believe them. But 
I've been told that I cannot go swimming in my boxer shorts that 
look like swimming trunks because they are underwear and I could 
get into trouble over that… i.e. someone MIGHT be offended. Which 
is kinds of odd, cause in my own country I can go swimming naked 
and basically nobody would be offended, if spotted they might be 
amused, but not offended.)

Ola.
Mar 18 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/18/2014 10:24 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 However, I am upset about the widespread US term "caucasian", not
 because it is a bad word, but because of the Aryan connotations that has
 some seriously bad vibes to it after 2WW and the nazi worship of
 "scandinavian genes".

 The term "caucasian" is incredibly bad taste, and I find it offensive. I
 cringe when I cross off "caucasian" on US papers. It is if I am forced
 to declare myself Aryan.


I find that interesting. This is the first I've ever heard of 
"caucasian" being even potentially offensive.

In the US, referring to an ethnicity by the name of a color is somewhat 
borderline on the offensive/inoffensive scale. And by that I mean, 
nobody really knows whether or not they should avoid saying it.

Two specific colors, "yellow" and "red", are pretty much accepted as 
"you just don't say it" because they (apparently - it was well before my 
time) had a history of being used as derogatory.

But "black" and "white" are less clear. Ever since the US civil rights 
movement, "colored" has become accepted as a term that "you just don't 
say" (despite still being used as the "C" in the NAACP, confusingly 
enough). So "black" was used to replace it. But then for some reason I'm 
completely ignorant of, many people started considering "black" to be 
taboo too, and started insisting people say "African American", which I 
find rather goofy since not everyone of that apperently-unnameable 
ethnicity is American at all.

So americans never know whether it's ok to say "black". And they know 
it's not ok to say "red" or "yellow" (unless you simply mean "yellow" as 
"afraid", but you better make darn sure nobody's going to misunderstand 
you, which is probably why even though "green" and "blue" are still 
occasionally used to mean "jealous" and "sad", "yellow" is no longer 
used as "afraid" unless pronounced in a clearly "Wild West" accent like 
"yelluh"). So all that question and taboo about colors leads to 
uncertainty about whether it's still ok to say "white", even though 
"white" is still used all the time anyway and I've never seen anyone get 
offended.

So that uncertainty leads americans to use "caucasion" (apparently 
derived from the extremely academic term "caucasoid", or so I've been 
told) just out of paranoia, since it's seen as far too pedantic and 
technical to possibly be offensive.

But then, the African-descendent counterparts of "caucasion" and 
"caucasoid", ie "negro" and "negroid", are taboo because they sound too 
much like the word we're expected to refer to as "the N word" (even 
though rappers of that ethnicity have famously tossed it around like 
it's nothing - which I always assumed was partly done to dispel the 
negative connotations, but I guess some people would rather keep it as 
offensive - personally I don't give a crap, I just wish people would 
make up their minds). But of course, in many languages, "negro" is 
literally the word for the color "black", so go figure.

It's all a rediculous mess, really. I say we just refer to ALL groups as 
"jackass", because I think really we all deserve it :)



 the world: "Uhh, what's the big deal?" Personally, I think it's
 positively bonkers to worry about kids being scarred by seeing
 something they themselves used to suck on, but whatever.


 Actually kids are more scarred by being told that such things are taboo.
 Being relaxed about the human body of others is a good path to feeling
 good about your own body.


Yea, but according to some, we're supposed to feel ashamed of our bodies. ;)


 (Again, just about all american I've met has expressed that they have no
 problems with nudity themselves, and I believe them.


Heh, There was one time I was in the locker room for some swimming pool, 
and an elderly gent was right in the middle of changing. He was in no 
hurry to finish, either. There were similar situations with my first 
college roommate too, an [american-]football player who wasn't exactly 
shy before/after showering. I actually found both of those cases 
slightly disturbing and the mental images still haunt me ;)

But that said, I still find both examples as completely insufficient 
justification for bans on nudity. Fact of the matter is, I like to use 
both as shining examples of "Just because you don't want to see 
something doesn't mean it should be banned".


 But I've been told
 that I cannot go swimming in my boxer shorts that look like swimming
 trunks because they are underwear and I could get into trouble over
 that… i.e. someone MIGHT be offended. Which is kinds of odd, cause in my
 own country I can go swimming naked and basically nobody would be
 offended, if spotted they might be amused, but not offended.)


Yea, I find your stance on that much more sensible. I guess one could 
make an argument about questions of sanitation, but in a pool, if 
someone isn't clean I'm not sure swimming apparel is really going to 
make a huge difference.

Admittedly, certain parts of the US are moving around to a more 
european-like attitude, albiet slowly (Particularly on the west coast 
which has always been known for being the most liberal part of the 
country.) I've heard of a court case (IANAL, of course) in San Fransisco 
where non-disruptive, non-sexualized public nudity was ruled legal. And 
it's either there or maybe Portland that has an annual non-clothed 
bicycling event. And I've heard that some court case in New York City 
ruled non-disruptive toplessness legal. Something similar in Canada too, 
IIRC. It's still nothing like certain other parts of the world, but 
still, baby steps.

'Course, that said, there's other matters I care much more about. After 
all, I'm in Cleveland, even if it were permitted here (I'm not aware of 
it being allowed), it'd be too damn cold half the time anyway ;)
Mar 19 2014
next sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 07:51:06 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:


 But "black" and "white" are less clear. Ever since the US civil 
 rights movement, "colored" has become accepted as a term that 
 "you just don't say" (despite still being used as the "C" in 
 the NAACP, confusingly enough). So "black" was used to replace 
 it. But then for some reason I'm completely ignorant of, many 
 people started considering "black" to be taboo too, and started 
 insisting people say "African American", which I find rather 
 goofy since not everyone of that apperently-unnameable 
 ethnicity is American at all.


Nor is everyone who is "African" "black" in the sense outlined 
above (cf. Northern Africa). The problem is that as long as a 
group is discriminated against (overtly or covertly), it doesn't 
matter what new name you make up in order to sound less 
offensive, it will soon be perceived as derogatory. That's why 
you have negro > colored > black > African American. It only 
shows that discrimination has never really stopped.

[...]

 even though "white" is still used all the time anyway and I've 
 never seen anyone get offended.


QED. "white" has no negative connotations simply because the 
majority of people are white. The thing is as long there is 
racism and discrimination against minorities (be it ethnicity or 
sexual orientation or religion), people will always feel uneasy 
about it and it will always result in twisted minds (political 
correctness is a symptom, and proof, of the madness of racism and 
discrimination). There is no way out _within_ this framework 
(that's why pc has failed), the only way out is to leave the 
framework. Yes, we are all jackasses!
Mar 19 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/19/2014 6:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 07:51:06 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 [...]

 even though "white" is still used all the time anyway and I've never
 seen anyone get offended.


 QED. "white" has no negative connotations simply because the majority of
 people are white.


The majority of people are Asian. The majority of Americans are white. 
But I'm being pedantic. :)

Of course, if I want get *really* pedantic, I'm not certain if those are 
actual "majorities" (ie >50%) or simply just the largest (erm, I mean 
most numerous) ethnic groups. But I don't want to get that pedantic ;)

But you make a good point. If one group has historically been treated 
badly, then any reference to them has a certain chance of being 
interpreted as derogatory. I've noticed that the more fresh the memory 
of ill-treatment, or the more such memory is maintained and cultivated, 
the more likely things will be interpreted, or misinterpreted, as offensive.

Interestingly enough, it makes no difference whether the discrimination 
is still happening or not: As long as people remember that is *has* 
happened, there will *always* be a higher chance of someone interpreting 
a statement as derogatory, even if it wasn't intended to be. Choose to 
believe discrimination exists and it will *always* be found *somewhere*, 
even if it has to be subconsciously fabricated in order to fulfill the 
preconceived belief that it still exists.

Great example of this phenomenon is Resident Evil:

Several games, one after another, involving battle for survival against 
hordes of people-turned-bloodthirty-zombies (infected by an evil 
entity). First game set in an American mansion, battling white American 
zombies, everything's ok. Next game set in an American town, battling 
more white American zombies, everything's ok. Three more games, all 
fine. Then one set in Spain with (obviously) Spanish zombies. 
Everything's *still* good.

Then, the same *non-American* developer, Capcom, makes the unfortunate 
mistake of doing a North American release of a new Resident Evil taking 
place in...Africa. Obviously, any zombies in Africa would 
be...uhh...African? Oh, holy shit, *now* all hell breaks loose. 
Surprise, surprise, *now* some crazed fucking nutjob climbs out of the 
woodwork and starts squawking all over about how overtly racist this 
game suddenly is. Same fucking game as the rest of the decade-old 
series, just different location. But no, *now* it's racist. So where the 
fuck was she when the rest of the series was made? Off deciding "Oh, 
well it's obviously ok if they're killing whiteys!" or some such? Bah. 
In any case, so much for equality.

Nobody (at least in the US) discriminates against Italians or Irish 
anymore. Oh, they used to get a lot of crap. Hell, they got *plenty* of 
shit from people. All ethnic groups in the US did at some point in time. 
But then it was dwarfed by the whole African slavery thing, and civil 
rights and women's lib, etc so everyone forgot to continue worrying 
about Irish discrimination, Italian discrimination, etc. *That's* what 
killed it off. Not some idiotic, self-perpetuating, discrimination witch 
hunt.

Anti-white derogatory stuff no longer exists *because* we all just shrug 
it off. Nobody's choosing to be offended, therefore it can't offend. It 
has no teeth. Because we've given it none.

This happened for one reason: Because we lost all our remaining excuses 
to be offended. Hell, as americans, we're all too busy playing guilt 
trip anyway over some crap that was pulled (in *part* of the country) by 
some grossly unethical asshats who none of us have ever even met (let 
alone *been* one) because they've all been dead and gone for over a century.

Point of all this being, and history has proved this, discrimination 
will always be kept alive in the hearts of people who insist on forever 
being offended by it. It might still exist. Or it might not. But whether 
or not it exists has long since stopped being relevant, and if/when it 
ends we'll never even notice anyway. Because as soon as it does go away, 
it will only continue living on as a specter, built and maintained by 
those who choose to believe in it, all because they're too afraid to 
relinquish their comfortable, familiar self-identity as a "victim" of 
some vague, conveniently hidden, indentity-less, anyone-or-anything villain.
Mar 19 2014
next sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 13:08:00 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:

 On 3/19/2014 6:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 07:51:06 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:
 [...]

 even though "white" is still used all the time anyway and 
 I've never
 seen anyone get offended.


 QED. "white" has no negative connotations simply because the 
 majority of
 people are white.


 The majority of people are Asian. The majority of Americans are 
 white. But I'm being pedantic. :)

 Of course, if I want get *really* pedantic, I'm not certain if 
 those are actual "majorities" (ie >50%) or simply just the 
 largest (erm, I mean most numerous) ethnic groups. But I don't 
 want to get that pedantic ;)


The dominant culture is white, or rather WASP. It doesn't matter 
if the majority is actually white. The WASP culture is still the 
one that defines that standards.


 But you make a good point. If one group has historically been 
 treated badly, then any reference to them has a certain chance 
 of being interpreted as derogatory. I've noticed that the more 
 fresh the memory of ill-treatment, or the more such memory is 
 maintained and cultivated, the more likely things will be 
 interpreted, or misinterpreted, as offensive.

 Interestingly enough, it makes no difference whether the 
 discrimination is still happening or not: As long as people 
 remember that is *has* happened, there will *always* be a 
 higher chance of someone interpreting a statement as 
 derogatory, even if it wasn't intended to be. Choose to believe 
 discrimination exists and it will *always* be found 
 *somewhere*, even if it has to be subconsciously fabricated in 
 order to fulfill the preconceived belief that it still exists.

 Great example of this phenomenon is Resident Evil:

 Several games, one after another, involving battle for survival 
 against hordes of people-turned-bloodthirty-zombies (infected 
 by an evil entity). First game set in an American mansion, 
 battling white American zombies, everything's ok. Next game set 
 in an American town, battling more white American zombies, 
 everything's ok. Three more games, all fine. Then one set in 
 Spain with (obviously) Spanish zombies. Everything's *still* 
 good.

 Then, the same *non-American* developer, Capcom, makes the 
 unfortunate mistake of doing a North American release of a new 
 Resident Evil taking place in...Africa. Obviously, any zombies 
 in Africa would be...uhh...African? Oh, holy shit, *now* all 
 hell breaks loose. Surprise, surprise, *now* some crazed 
 fucking nutjob climbs out of the woodwork and starts squawking 
 all over about how overtly racist this game suddenly is. Same 
 fucking game as the rest of the decade-old series, just 
 different location. But no, *now* it's racist. So where the 
 fuck was she when the rest of the series was made? Off deciding 
 "Oh, well it's obviously ok if they're killing whiteys!" or 
 some such? Bah. In any case, so much for equality.

 Nobody (at least in the US) discriminates against Italians or 
 Irish anymore. Oh, they used to get a lot of crap. Hell, they 
 got *plenty* of shit from people. All ethnic groups in the US 
 did at some point in time. But then it was dwarfed by the whole 
 African slavery thing, and civil rights and women's lib, etc so 
 everyone forgot to continue worrying about Irish 
 discrimination, Italian discrimination, etc. *That's* what 
 killed it off. Not some idiotic, self-perpetuating, 
 discrimination witch hunt.


One of the reasons why Irish (and Italian) immigrants stopped 
being discriminated against was because they would find the 
lowest (indeed very low) common denominator, i.e. giving out 
about blacks. At least they were white (the Italians less so, but 
still not really black), albeit Catholic.


 Anti-white derogatory stuff no longer exists *because* we all 
 just shrug it off. Nobody's choosing to be offended, therefore 
 it can't offend. It has no teeth. Because we've given it none.


That's easy, if you are part of the dominant culture. Also, 
"white" is too broad a term so every white person can choose not 
to identify with it and point somewhere else (we're not rednecks 
here in NY!). But if you attack a certain set of beliefs held by 
the dominant culture, hell will break loose. Within the dominant 
group, it's not an ethnic thing, it's about beliefs. If you 
question them, you won't have an easy life.


 This happened for one reason: Because we lost all our remaining 
 excuses to be offended. Hell, as americans, we're all too busy 
 playing guilt trip anyway over some crap that was pulled (in 
 *part* of the country) by some grossly unethical asshats who 
 none of us have ever even met (let alone *been* one) because 
 they've all been dead and gone for over a century.

 Point of all this being, and history has proved this, 
 discrimination will always be kept alive in the hearts of 
 people who insist on forever being offended by it. It might 
 still exist. Or it might not. But whether or not it exists has 
 long since stopped being relevant, and if/when it ends we'll 
 never even notice anyway. Because as soon as it does go away, 
 it will only continue living on as a specter, built and 
 maintained by those who choose to believe in it, all because 
 they're too afraid to relinquish their comfortable, familiar 
 self-identity as a "victim" of some vague, conveniently hidden, 
 indentity-less, anyone-or-anything villain.
Mar 19 2014
parent reply 1100110 <0b1100110 gmail.com> writes:
I just want to point out that somehow the thread about how we need to 
maintain a professional attitude in the forums deteriorated into 
discussing in depth racism.

We literally couldn't have picked a better thread to highjack.  =P
Mar 23 2014
parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Sunday, 23 March 2014 at 18:08:09 UTC, 1100110 wrote:

 I just want to point out that somehow the thread about how we 
 need to maintain a professional attitude in the forums 
 deteriorated into discussing in depth racism.


Actually, racism was not discussed. What was discussed was 
cultural bias in what is appropriate using racial terms as an 
example.

However, I do question the public slandering of Ramon in a thread 
about appropriateness of posts. I don't think there is any 
cultural bias in that.
Mar 23 2014
parent reply 1100110 <0b1100110 gmail.com> writes:
On 3/23/14, 13:13, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 On Sunday, 23 March 2014 at 18:08:09 UTC, 1100110 wrote:

 I just want to point out that somehow the thread about how we need to
 maintain a professional attitude in the forums deteriorated into
 discussing in depth racism.


 Actually, racism was not discussed. What was discussed was cultural bias
 in what is appropriate using racial terms as an example.


Tomato, tomato.  I just found it slightly amusing that this is where the 
conversation went, not trying to call anyone or say that anything said 
was racist. I realize too late that my message could be interpreted in a 
way I didn't intend.


 However, I do question the public slandering of Ramon in a thread about
 appropriateness of posts. I don't think there is any cultural bias in that.


Yeah... I think I would have been ok with that had he been using an 
obvious alias(Anonymous, etc) or at least wasn't mentioned by name...

It does seem in poor taste.
Mar 23 2014
parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Sunday, 23 March 2014 at 21:42:46 UTC, 1100110 wrote:

 Tomato, tomato.  I just found it slightly amusing that this is 
 where the conversation went, not trying to call anyone or say


Yeah, I agree that it is somewhat interesting. I guess it is a 
topic that is in a way fascinating because it easy to discuss and 
where regional differences are quite extreme.

Whenever I hear the term "the black community", I get puzzled and 
ask myself "what black community?". I guess that is part of the 
problem, what does a black professor at MIT and a black drug 
dealer in Bronx have in common? Not much, except some exposure to 
racism. So whenever the term "black", "african american" etc is 
tied to negative news reports the decent majority of black people 
feel misrepresented by the term over time. (And news tend to be 
negative and like to stick labels to minorities.)


 Yeah... I think I would have been ok with that had he been 
 using an obvious alias(Anonymous, etc) or at least wasn't 
 mentioned by name...

 It does seem in poor taste.


I followed the forums lurking at the time. Ramon is/was very 
enthusiatic about D, and shared that enthusiasm with great force. 
It is kind of sad when the community does not back up that 
enthusiasm and direct it in a direction where it can be of good 
use. It is quite common for newbies to be vocal, it happens 
because they are enthusiastic and want to bond with other users, 
but don't feel they get the response they are looking for. On the 
other hand the "veterans" in online communities feel a need to 
put the newbies in their proper place. It is a common phenomenon 
and is called "newbie bashing" (you see this in the army too). It 
is important that moderators step in and take the "welcoming 
role", setting a friendly tone, until the newbie has found his 
place and figured out "what the community is all about". :-)

I think it is important that the D community realize that C++ is 
such an annoyance that finding a better C++, that is not quite 
there yet, is both a revelation and a disappointment that can be 
quite forceful. I think the D community could utilize this 
enthusiasm better. In that regard I think this thread has some 
merit. Too many "internal jokes", "weird terminology" and 
"unclear decision making paths" might send signals of a community 
that is hard to break into.
Mar 24 2014
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 07:35:20 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 I followed the forums lurking at the time. Ramon is/was very 
 enthusiatic about D, and shared that enthusiasm with great 
 force. It is kind of sad when the community does not back up 
 that enthusiasm and direct it in a direction where it can be of 
 good use. It is quite common for newbies to be vocal, it 
 happens because they are enthusiastic and want to bond with 
 other users, but don't feel they get the response they are 
 looking for. On the other hand the "veterans" in online 
 communities feel a need to put the newbies in their proper 
 place. It is a common phenomenon and is called "newbie bashing" 
 (you see this in the army too). It is important that moderators 
 step in and take the "welcoming role", setting a friendly tone, 
 until the newbie has found his place and figured out "what the 
 community is all about". :-)


D community is single most friendly and helpful place I have ever 
seen in the internet. However, friendliness is something that 
goes both ways. If person continuously ignores any internal rules 
of conduct, demands any special attention or behaves explicitly 
hostile, such person has no value for community. It does not 
matter if is trolling or simply bad attitude, does not matter if 
enthusiasm is real.

Such cases happen time to time but at the same time much more 
people are coming and asking questions and getting help and 
attention without any single harsh word. It is all about attitude.
Mar 24 2014
parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 13:31:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 D community is single most friendly and helpful place I have 
 ever seen in the internet.


All communities rate themselves that way, I think it is somewhere 
in the middle. Meaning: there is room for improvement.

There is a little bit too much elitism IMO.


 However, friendliness is something that goes both ways. If 
 person continuously ignores any internal rules of conduct, 
 demands any special attention or behaves explicitly hostile, 
 such person has no value for community. It does not matter if 
 is trolling or simply bad attitude, does not matter if 
 enthusiasm is real.


It should, because newbie dynamics are particular to newbies.


 It is all about  attitude.


Uhu, but the community/moderators are evaluated by lurkers. Not 
by how newbie acts, but how what kind of response they get. If 
you deal well with demanding newbies, the community is portraying 
itself as welcoming (or even professional):

You can safely assume that 90% of the list "participants" have 
never actually written a single word in the newsgroups.

In that regard W.B. was right. The thread being questioned was 
very introvert. While maintaining group boundaries is important 
they should not establish barriers to entry. In that regard 
stating an opposing view diminished the boundary defining aspects 
of it.
Mar 24 2014
parent reply "Andrej Mitrovic" <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 22:24:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 13:31:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 D community is single most friendly and helpful place I have 
 ever seen in the internet.


 All communities rate themselves that way, I think it is 
 somewhere in the middle. Meaning: there is room for improvement.

 There is a little bit too much elitism IMO.


I can't see this anywhere, could you elaborate? All the major 
contributors to D are always helpful towards newbies, especially 
in D.learn. And none of us think D is perfect. You should stay 
around #d on freenode for a while, plenty of us whine about D 
deficiencies every once in a while. But we continue to use the 
language because it still pulls its weight.
Mar 24 2014
next sibling parent reply "Andrej Mitrovic" <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 23:04:16 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 22:24:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
 wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 13:31:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 D community is single most friendly and helpful place I have 
 ever seen in the internet.


 All communities rate themselves that way, I think it is 
 somewhere in the middle. Meaning: there is room for 
 improvement.

 There is a little bit too much elitism IMO.


 I can't see this anywhere, could you elaborate?


Sorry, I didn't read this thread about Ramon yet (I'm just going 
through these posts). I'll look it up now.
Mar 24 2014
parent reply "Andrej Mitrovic" <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
on
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 23:06:27 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 23:04:16 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 22:24:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
 wrote:

 On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 13:31:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 D community is single most friendly and helpful place I have 
 ever seen in the internet.


 All communities rate themselves that way, I think it is 
 somewhere in the middle. Meaning: there is room for 
 improvement.

 There is a little bit too much elitism IMO.


 I can't see this anywhere, could you elaborate?


 Sorry, I didn't read this thread about Ramon yet (I'm just 
 going through these posts). I'll look it up now.


Oh you mean this guy?:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/csusavszritzlaqdsxgp forum.dlang.org

That guy really does act like a typical troll to me.
Mar 24 2014
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:08:05PM +0000, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
[...]

Sorry, I didn't read this thread about Ramon yet (I'm just going through
these posts). I'll look it up now.


 
 Oh you mean this guy?:
 http://forum.dlang.org/post/csusavszritzlaqdsxgp forum.dlang.org
 
 That guy really does act like a typical troll to me.


It's a bit telling that he stopped posting almost exactly around the
time Iain posted a link to the Flame Warriors[1]. :P  Coincidence?
Perhaps...

[1] http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/


T

-- 
It's bad luck to be superstitious. -- YHL
Mar 24 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/24/2014 8:12 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:08:05PM +0000, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 [...]

 Sorry, I didn't read this thread about Ramon yet (I'm just going through
 these posts). I'll look it up now.


 Oh you mean this guy?:
 http://forum.dlang.org/post/csusavszritzlaqdsxgp forum.dlang.org

 That guy really does act like a typical troll to me.




I didn't have a problem with most of his posts, but constantly waving 
around that "windoze" flamebait at every possible opportunity (and then 
feigning innocence about it) was the real problem. And I'm even saying 
that as someone who does carry a lot of hatred toward windows (among 
many other things ;) ).


 It's a bit telling that he stopped posting almost exactly around the
 time Iain posted a link to the Flame Warriors[1]. :P  Coincidence?
 Perhaps...

 [1] http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/


"We're the flaaaame waaarriors!
Don't wanna flame no more!
We're the flaaaame waaarriors!
But maybe tonight, just for one night,
they'll be gone!"

With apologies to Dokken :)
Mar 24 2014
parent "Corry" <. ..com> writes:
 I didn't have a problem with most of his posts, but constantly 
 waving around that "windoze" flamebait at every possible 
 opportunity (and then feigning innocence about it) was the real 
 problem. And I'm even saying that as someone who does carry a 
 lot of hatred toward windows (among many other things ;) ).


OMG, someone made an insulting Windows pun; call the cops!
Mar 24 2014
prev sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 25 March 2014 00:12, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:

 On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:08:05PM +0000, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 [...]

Sorry, I didn't read this thread about Ramon yet (I'm just going through
these posts). I'll look it up now.


 Oh you mean this guy?:
 http://forum.dlang.org/post/csusavszritzlaqdsxgp forum.dlang.org

 That guy really does act like a typical troll to me.


 It's a bit telling that he stopped posting almost exactly around the
 time Iain posted a link to the Flame Warriors[1]. :P  Coincidence?
 Perhaps...

 [1] http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/


He probably looked through some of the descriptions and realised he
was a http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/jerk.htm
Mar 25 2014
prev sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 23:04:16 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 There is a little bit too much elitism IMO.


 I can't see this anywhere, could you elaborate?


I could. >;-}


 All the major contributors to D are always helpful towards 
 newbies, especially in D.learn.


Yes, bearophile, John Colvin and some others are doing a great 
job over at D.learn. That is true.
Mar 24 2014
prev sibling parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:07:54 -0400, Nick Sabalausky  
<SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:


 Of course, if I want get *really* pedantic, I'm not certain if those are  
 actual "majorities" (ie >50%) or simply just the largest (erm, I mean  
 most numerous) ethnic groups. But I don't want to get that pedantic ;)


The word you are looking for is "plurality"

-Steve
Mar 19 2014
prev sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 07:51:06 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:

 I find that interesting. This is the first I've ever heard of 
 "caucasian" being even potentially offensive.


Well, I am not offended by the term, I dislike it. I am offended 
by having to provide racial information. I am not sure what other 
norwegians feel about that, though. After 2WW where we lost over 
1/3 of our jewish population (which was small already, jews were 
barred from entry until 1851) laws were established that banned 
registration of race, sexuality etc (unless where it has a very 
clear function of necessity). So my main objection is to having 
race and sexuality registered.

But there is a bias in terms like "nordic" to race, even though 
it formally isn't a racial expression. And when we talk about 
north Europe, east Europe, southern Europe we refer to culture, 
but there is also a bias towards genetic traits if the context is 
about what people look like. Like, "americans" is more likely to 
evoke stereotypical images of middle class white americans than 
multi cultural america or the native americans.

I think talking about "white norwegians", or "white swedes" is 
somewhat weird and makes me a bit uneasy, either because it is 
too close or because the labels "norwegian" and "swede" already 
have a white bias, so making it explicit makes it overly racial? 
But talking about "white americans", "the whites in Africa" etc 
is no problem at all and is politically correct. Perhaps because 
the usual context for those expressions is to talk about unfair 
treatment of minorities and lack of distribution of wealth.


 So that uncertainty leads americans to use "caucasion" 
 (apparently derived from the extremely academic term 
 "caucasoid", or so I've been told) just out of paranoia, since 
 it's seen as far too pedantic and technical to possibly be 
 offensive.


And this technical focus is what I object to since the nazis did 
take a rather "scientific" approach to this by measuring skulls 
etc to identify "pure genes".

Besides, how many third generation non-white american in the US 
have an actual ethnicity that makes sense? Like 1/4 african, 1/8 
german, etc…


 But that said, I still find both examples as completely 
 insufficient justification for bans on nudity. Fact of the 
 matter is, I like to use both as shining examples of "Just 
 because you don't want to see something doesn't mean it should 
 be banned".


:-) Well, we are all coloured by the taboos that we were taught 
as kids. Getting over those is a challenge. I would personally 
not be offended by any cussing in a foreign language, I think. 
Though there probably are some vulgar cussing in norwegian that 
I'd rather not be affiliated with.


 part of the country.) I've heard of a court case (IANAL, of 
 course) in San Fransisco where non-disruptive, non-sexualized 
 public nudity was ruled legal. And it's either there or maybe 
 Portland that has an annual non-clothed bicycling event. And 
 I've heard that some court case in New York City ruled 
 non-disruptive toplessness legal. Something similar in Canada 
 too, IIRC. It's still nothing like certain other parts of the 
 world, but still, baby steps.


In the 80s the feminist movement made a big point of top less sun 
bathing, so you would find it everywhere (also in parks 
sometimes). But then it became less common outside beaches. Not 
sure why, probably partially because of breast cancer news 
reports and a lack of interest after the point had been made? I 
think it is difficult to uphold in cold region where you have to 
wear lots of cloths most of the year. I think it sends signals of 
being self-indulgent if you do it "in your face" in a park these 
days, but if you find your own spot then it is no problem.

Of course, the population density of my country is low and the 
water front is accessible to the public even on private land (by 
law), so if you want to be nude you can always find your own spot 
somewhere.
Mar 20 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:01:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 One can argue that it's all relative but that's rather 
 ineffective. The reality is I do work at Facebook with people 
 from all over the globe and though cultural adaptation is on 
 rare occasions an issue, it's never been considered 
 inapproachable or even difficult.


Well yes and no. People come in a company and adapt to the 
existing standards. It is much easier to do face to face than 
online. For instance, I often speak French with one of my 
coworker. We speak to each other in ways that would seems 
completely unacceptable by the usual standards in the company.

PS: I works at Facebook as well.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 17 March 2014 21:01, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 On 3/17/14, 11:49 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:18:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:09:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

    Seems like Walter wants it seriously
    professional. No joking around about D.



 Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a
 professional work environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. This
 shouldn't be a mystery.



 Appropriateness of a joke is purely defined by a culture and is
 completely subjective. It is perfectly fine to define your own rules
 on your forum. Trying to appeal to some common morale as a basis for
 that is not.



 +1

 As I mentioned in my post below, almost anything is offensive to
 someone, somewhere.



 Heh, case in point - there was a gentleman going by "Ramon" at a point in
 this forum who flew off the handle taking offense at something I said (no
 idea what exactly that was).



 You won't find a unified view of "Inappropriate" even among a very
 homogenous group of people, let alone an ad hoc group of collaborators
 and users spanning the entire globe, an age range of 60+ years and a
 wide variety of religious/cultural/political views and environments.



 One can argue that it's all relative but that's rather ineffective. The
 reality is I do work at Facebook with people from all over the globe and
 though cultural adaptation is on rare occasions an issue, it's never been
 considered inapproachable or even difficult.

 That said, I don't think it's time to establish community guidelines etc.
 although at some point larger participation might create a need.


+1

I haven't read any other comments in that thread apart from the
response from Andrei, so I can't comment for any responses after, or
the appropriateness of them.  But just incase you missed the original
point entirely.  I was suggesting a marketing strategy for Andrei in
the form of sarcasm.  For those who don't understand sarcasm, it's a
traditionally British art-form, much like Blasphemy being a
traditionally Italian - particularly around the region of Tuscany.

This suggestion was not spontaneous, inspired in fact by the
impression he gives off when he goes on about publicising D.

A recent example, set a few days *after* dlang.sexy. I made him aware
that GDC has started (fingers cross) doing regular binary build
releases for Linux native and ARM cross compilers.

The Response was:  "We need a README, a Blog Post, a Public
Announcement, and Glamorous TV Adverts!"

OK - I made that last bit up.  But given my ineptitude towards social
media, I see all forms of social media advertisement as tedious forms
of alluring appeal.

Anyway, I hope you enjoyed my suggestion Andrei. :)
Mar 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Craig Dillabaugh" <cdillaba cg.scs.carleton.ca> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:01:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
snip

 Heh, case in point - there was a gentleman going by "Ramon" at 
 a point in this forum who flew off the handle taking offense at 
 something I said (no idea what exactly that was).


"Destroy" was the offending expression I believe.

Now, why can I remember that, but I have to constantly use Google 
to look up any programming structure that I use only 
semi-frequenlty?  :o(
Mar 19 2014
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/19/14, 10:13 AM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:01:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 snip

 Heh, case in point - there was a gentleman going by "Ramon" at a point
 in this forum who flew off the handle taking offense at something I
 said (no idea what exactly that was).


 "Destroy" was the offending expression I believe.

 Now, why can I remember that, but I have to constantly use Google to
 look up any programming structure that I use only semi-frequenlty?  :o(


Same here. I do remember that wasn't the peak of it. That happened when 
I tried to explain something as a "cultural difference". Probably it was 
taken as "cultural inferiority/superiority".

Andrei
Mar 19 2014
next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 17:43:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 Same here. I do remember that wasn't the peak of it. That 
 happened when I tried to explain something as a "cultural 
 difference". Probably it was taken as "cultural 
 inferiority/superiority".

 Andrei


Talk about projection...
Mar 19 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 17:43:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 Same here. I do remember that wasn't the peak of it. That 
 happened when I tried to explain something as a "cultural 
 difference". Probably it was taken as "cultural 
 inferiority/superiority".

 Andrei


More like feigned idiocy on Ramon's part. There was the whole 
"windoze" debacle with him as well. I was never sure if he was 
here to discuss D or just subtly troll.
Mar 19 2014
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/19/2014 12:43 PM, Meta wrote:

 There was the whole "windoze" debacle
 with him as well.


The "windoze" thing was tired and old in 1990. So was Micro$oft.
Mar 19 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 19 March 2014 19:43, Meta <jared771 gmail.com> wrote:

 On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 17:43:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Same here. I do remember that wasn't the peak of it. That happened when I
 tried to explain something as a "cultural difference". Probably it was taken
 as "cultural inferiority/superiority".

 Andrei



 More like feigned idiocy on Ramon's part. There was the whole "windoze"
 debacle with him as well. I was never sure if he was here to discuss D or
 just subtly troll.


Oh, *that* Ramon.  I was trying to remember who he was. :-)

I seem to recall people being rather unfairly direct towards him on
that, which in turn made the quality of his responses drop tenfold.
Though I'm biased, I think my initial response to him was subtle, fair
and justified.  If he continues to blindly ignore expressed wishes on
netiquette, then simply don't response - or *do* respond, but save it
in your drafts. ;-)
Mar 19 2014
prev sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:41:26PM +0000, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 On 19 March 2014 19:43, Meta <jared771 gmail.com> wrote:

 On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 17:43:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Same here. I do remember that wasn't the peak of it. That happened
 when I tried to explain something as a "cultural difference".
 Probably it was taken as "cultural inferiority/superiority".

 Andrei



 More like feigned idiocy on Ramon's part. There was the whole
 "windoze" debacle with him as well. I was never sure if he was here
 to discuss D or just subtly troll.


 
 Oh, *that* Ramon.  I was trying to remember who he was. :-)
 
 I seem to recall people being rather unfairly direct towards him on
 that, which in turn made the quality of his responses drop tenfold.
 Though I'm biased, I think my initial response to him was subtle, fair
 and justified.  If he continues to blindly ignore expressed wishes on
 netiquette, then simply don't response - or *do* respond, but save it
 in your drafts. ;-)


I had quite a few responses to him that sat in the =postponed file that
eventually I deleted, because I realized that it would only set him off
even more. Sometimes, the only way to win is to not play.


T

-- 
Try to keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out. -- theboz
Mar 19 2014
parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 23:18:55 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:


Sometimes, the only way to win is to not play.


 T


+1. You should add this to your list of quotes.
Mar 20 2014
parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 05:35:53 -0400, Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> wrote:


 On Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 23:18:55 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:


 Sometimes, the only way to win is to not play.


 T


 +1. You should add this to your list of quotes.


-WOPR, War Games
Mar 20 2014
prev sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:18:34 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 18:09:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 3:45 AM, sclytrack wrote:

    Seems like Walter wants it seriously
    professional. No joking around about D.


 Jokes are fine. I post plenty myself. Jokes are fine in a 
 professional work environment. Inappropriate jokes are not. 
 This shouldn't be a mystery.


 Appropriateness of a joke is purely defined by a culture and is 
 completely subjective. It is perfectly fine to define your own 
 rules on your forum. Trying to appeal to some common morale as 
 a basis for that is not.


Had a discussion with my Polish roomate recently about that. If 
we talked to people in the US just like we would have done in 
French or Polish, people would find it completely unacceptable. 
And Dutch are much worse (or better, depending how you see it).

This is cultural.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Maxim Fomin" <maxim maxim-fomin.ru> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:31:54 UTC, Namespace wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 09:18:43 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some 
 locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


 Where? Any specific threads?


 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


Taking into account lots of newbies willing to share their 
knowledge and wisdom by giving actually bad/wrong advices, there 
is no surprise that forums can be abused. Add to this lots of 
folks who want to comment for the sake of commenting, who add 5 
cents in each thread without any necessity just to be noticed, 
one can conclude that information ratio (information/total talk) 
of the forum is quite low.

By the way, the thread you mentioned is actually quite innocent.
Mar 17 2014
parent "Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:46:47 UTC, Maxim Fomin wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:31:54 UTC, Namespace wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 09:18:43 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
 wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some 
 locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


 Where? Any specific threads?


 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 Taking into account lots of newbies willing to share their 
 knowledge and wisdom by giving actually bad/wrong advices, 
 there is no surprise that forums can be abused. Add to this 
 lots of folks who want to comment for the sake of commenting, 
 who add 5 cents in each thread without any necessity just to be 
 noticed, one can conclude that information ratio 
 (information/total talk) of the forum is quite low.

 By the way, the thread you mentioned is actually quite innocent.


That is the only thread I know that he had problems with.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.


I think that's a little unkind.

Nonetheless, I didn't really see anything particularly 
problematic in that thread.

Everything is offensive to someone. Some people find swearing 
highly offensive. Some people find highly direct discourse 
offensive (we've seen that here a few times). Some people find 
sexual references offensive. Some find the mention of anything 
political or controversial to be offensive and/or unprofessional 
(yes, FOSS/copyright etc. is in that bracket). I personally enjoy 
working in an environment where all the above are accepted in the 
day-to-day, or at least only mildly disapproved of.

Nonetheless, Walter's forum, Walter's rules.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "monarch_dodra" <monarchdodra gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.


Well that's uncalled for.

Plus, he does have a sense of humor.

My guess is he mistook the "quote" from that website, as actual 
thread content, which would have indeed been crossing the line 
(IMO).
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Graham Fawcett" <fawcett uwindsor.ca> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.


Obviously they don't. A forum moderator has a duty of care that 
supersedes his or her personal values and sense of humour.

The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, and 
should be addressed wherever it's found. If keeping sex jokes out 
of an otherwise-professional forum will encourage even one keen 
developer to stay a while longer in D space, then that's a 
tremendously small price to pay for an invaluable return.

Good on you for addressing this, Walter, even if the infraction 
was a small one.

Graham
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 15:50:12 UTC, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.





 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should be addressed wherever it's found. If keeping sex 
 jokes...


Sex jokes do not imply sexism. They can form a part of it, but I 
do not see evidence of that in this community at all.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Graham Fawcett" <fawcett uwindsor.ca> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 16:09:34 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 15:50:12 UTC, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
 wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.





 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should be addressed wherever it's found. If keeping sex 
 jokes...


 Sex jokes do not imply sexism. They can form a part of it, but 
 I do not see evidence of that in this community at all.


I agree that this community doesn't seem unhealthy; and also 
that, in general, sex jokes aren't necessarily a sign of sexism. 
But I also think it's smart to establish a wide margin on 
community practice. Correcting small, potentially harmful 
behaviours sets a boundary, and avoids having to deal with 
larger, certainly-harmful behaviours later on.

There are plenty of appropriate forums for sex jokes on the 
Internet, we can surely live without them here.

Graham
Mar 17 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 10:03 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 I agree that this community doesn't seem unhealthy; and also that, in general,
 sex jokes aren't necessarily a sign of sexism. But I also think it's smart to
 establish a wide margin on community practice. Correcting small, potentially
 harmful behaviours sets a boundary, and avoids having to deal with larger,
 certainly-harmful behaviours later on.

 There are plenty of appropriate forums for sex jokes on the Internet, we can
 surely live without them here.


My sentiments exactly. Thanks for posting this.

We (I'm presuming "we" :-) ) want D to succeed with professionals, and coming 
with that are the same standards of discourse one would expect in a
professional 
work environment.

And this community has been very professional by default, and I've been 
extremely pleased and proud at the high quality of the discussions here.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:26:08 -0400, Walter Bright  
<newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 On 3/17/2014 10:03 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 I agree that this community doesn't seem unhealthy; and also that, in  
 general,
 sex jokes aren't necessarily a sign of sexism. But I also think it's  
 smart to
 establish a wide margin on community practice. Correcting small,  
 potentially
 harmful behaviours sets a boundary, and avoids having to deal with  
 larger,
 certainly-harmful behaviours later on.

 There are plenty of appropriate forums for sex jokes on the Internet,  
 we can
 surely live without them here.


 My sentiments exactly. Thanks for posting this.

 We (I'm presuming "we" :-) ) want D to succeed with professionals, and  
 coming with that are the same standards of discourse one would expect in  
 a professional work environment.

 And this community has been very professional by default, and I've been  
 extremely pleased and proud at the high quality of the discussions here.


If this guy comes back, you may want to have a talk with him, then. He  
might have got the wrong impression from you.

http://forum.dlang.org/post/gnc2ml$14ch$1 digitalmars.com

-Steve
Mar 18 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/18/2014 7:53 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 If this guy comes back, you may want to have a talk with him, then. He
 might have got the wrong impression from you.

 http://forum.dlang.org/post/gnc2ml$14ch$1 digitalmars.com


Heh, oh man. I don't know about anyone else, but it was the leet-speak 
more than anything else that got under my skin :) Sometimes he'd have 
something real to say, but you'd have to decode it first.
Mar 18 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Araq" <rumpf_a web.de> writes:
 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should be addressed wherever it's found. If keeping sex 
 jokes out of an otherwise-professional forum will encourage 
 even one keen developer to stay a while longer in D space, then 
 that's a tremendously small price to pay for an invaluable 
 return.


Yeah but it can also discourage the many people who are fed up 
with political correctness. The "tremendously small price" might 
be much bigger than you think...
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "bachmeier" <no spam.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 19:29:10 UTC, Araq wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should be addressed wherever it's found. If keeping sex 
 jokes out of an otherwise-professional forum will encourage 
 even one keen developer to stay a while longer in D space, 
 then that's a tremendously small price to pay for an 
 invaluable return.


 Yeah but it can also discourage the many people who are fed up 
 with political correctness. The "tremendously small price" 
 might be much bigger than you think...


I cannot think of any case where restricting discussions of sex 
will restrict anyone's ability to write code in D or talk about 
the language's development.

I thank Walter for keeping these forums focused. It would be 
really hard to recommend D otherwise. There's no way I could 
recommend D to a class full of grad students if the primary forum 
for discussion were not family-friendly.
Mar 17 2014
parent "Jesse Phillips" <Jesse.K.Phillips+D gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:14:25 UTC, bachmeier wrote:

 I cannot think of any case where restricting discussions of sex 
 will restrict anyone's ability to write code in D or talk about 
 the language's development.

 I thank Walter for keeping these forums focused. It would be 
 really hard to recommend D otherwise. There's no way I could 
 recommend D to a class full of grad students if the primary 
 forum for discussion were not family-friendly.


I think it does though, the forum post which started this seemed 
to be on topic about D's publicity/marketing. Walter has voiced 
that he wishes not to have any sexual references in the threads.

As for "family-friendly." I take it you haven't been to D.learn. 
Swearing my be uncommon, but it does come out. This is similarly 
subjective since many families don't have much issue with their 
kids hearing/seeing swear words. While I don't have a family, I 
didn't see any issue with the offending thread.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 19:29:10 UTC, Araq wrote:

 Yeah but it can also discourage the many people who are fed up 
 with political correctness.


Good. If "not being a jerk" is such an onerous burden, their 
influence is almost certain to be harmful to the community in the 
long-term.

-Wyatt
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Araq" <rumpf_a web.de> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:15:52 UTC, Wyatt wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 19:29:10 UTC, Araq wrote:

 Yeah but it can also discourage the many people who are fed up 
 with political correctness.


 Good. If "not being a jerk" is such an onerous burden, their 
 influence is almost certain to be harmful to the community in 
 the long-term.

 -Wyatt


Ah so "being fed up with politicial correctness" is now the same 
as "being a jerk". Very well.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:00:08 UTC, Araq wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:15:52 UTC, Wyatt wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 19:29:10 UTC, Araq wrote:

 Yeah but it can also discourage the many people who are fed 
 up with political correctness.


 Good. If "not being a jerk" is such an onerous burden, their 
 influence is almost certain to be harmful to the community in 
 the long-term.

 -Wyatt


 Ah so "being fed up with politicial correctness" is now the 
 same as "being a jerk". Very well.


 From my personal experience in the UK, It's a pretty good 
indicator. Not exclusively, but perhaps 80% of the time. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHLnf5H4soU
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "Araq" <rumpf_a web.de> writes:
 From my personal experience in the UK, It's a pretty good 
 indicator. Not exclusively, but perhaps 80% of the time.


If only you would understand how ironic your argument is.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:13:17 UTC, Araq wrote:

 From my personal experience in the UK, It's a pretty good 
 indicator. Not exclusively, but perhaps 80% of the time.


 If only you would understand how ironic your argument is.


I'm not sure if it's an argument, more an observation... 
Nonetheless, please do enlighten :)
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:53:48 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 I'm not sure if it's an argument, more an observation... 
 Nonetheless, please do enlighten :)


"I am against offending people at all costs, so I'd better call 
that guy a jerk because he think differently"
Mar 17 2014
parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:56:21 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:53:48 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 I'm not sure if it's an argument, more an observation... 
 Nonetheless, please do enlighten :)


 "I am against offending people at all costs, so I'd better call 
 that guy a jerk because he think differently"


That's really not a fair representation of what I said.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 21:29:59 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 From my personal experience in the UK, It's a pretty good 
 indicator.


UK is a class society, US is a melting pot. In order to prevent 
eruptions if discontent an conflict you developed a careful 
politness as safe guards (which somtimes are perceived as 
dishonest, fake, shallow or manipulative by foreigners).

Countries with more homogene cultures can be more rhetorical and 
free speaking, because you have fewer factors to play up to? 
Finns have some fun cuss phrases that would be taken as offensive 
and sexist in the US, but as fun in nordic countries. Does that 
mean that scandinavian cultures are sexist and jerk like?
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 5:00 PM, Araq wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 20:15:52 UTC, Wyatt wrote:

 Good. If "not being a jerk" is such an onerous burden, their influence
 is almost certain to be harmful to the community in the long-term.


 Ah so "being fed up with politicial correctness" is now the same as
 "being a jerk". Very well.


very, very true. Politicial correctness has nothing whatsoever to do 
with politeness.

You wanna know what "political correctness" is about? I swear I'm mot 
making this up: You're no longer supposed to refer to "Attention Deficit 
Disorder" as such. Believe it or not, "political correctness"  now 
demands it be called "Attention Deficit *Hyperactivity* Disorder 
*WITHOUT Hyperactivity*". That's right, "hyperactivity without 
hyperactivity". Then they play off garbage like that as *somehow* being 
more friendly and polite, pretend their idiocy is actually being 
worthwhile instead of dragging us back to the damn puritan era, and then 
people actually *believe* their bullshit about "political correctness" 
actually having some connection to ethics.

But of course, ethics isn't something to be questioned, and so by 
(false) association, people are also scared shitless of questioning 
political correctness, too.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, and should


Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:15:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should


 Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.


And all these pull request we rejected because they were made by 
women ? HA! See!

Oh wait...
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "Araq" <rumpf_a web.de> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:33:40 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:15:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, 
 and should


 Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.


 And all these pull request we rejected because they were made 
 by women ? HA! See!

 Oh wait...


And all these women do not program because of the "pervasive 
sexism" in programming?! What a complete crock of shit.
Mar 17 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 6:45 PM, Araq wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:33:40 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:15:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, and should


 Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.


 And all these pull request we rejected because they were made by women
 ? HA! See!

 Oh wait...


 And all these women do not program because of the "pervasive sexism" in
 programming?! What a complete crock of shit.


Unfortunately, there is a *perceived* sexism in programming: Anytime 
something is predominantly male, there's hordes of people blindly 
assuming "it *must* be men trying to keep women out!" (Right, as if this 
were 1950). It wouldn't surprise me if, in some cases, this has become a 
self-fulfilling prophesy.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 6:33 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:15:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, and should


 Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.


 And all these pull request we rejected because they were made by women ?
 HA! See!

 Oh wait...


Exactly, right!

People see that software development is predominately male, and they 
assume "Oh, it *MUST* be because those EVIL, SEXIST men are TRYING to 
keep women out!" That genuinely pisses me off, what the hell is this, 
1920? When people actually *wanted* to join men's clubs and such 
post-college fraternities? For f...*couch*..."freaks" sake, one of the 
things I hate MOST about software dev is that it's such a saus...is that 
it's all guys.

There's only one kind of sexism in this profession, and that's the kind 
that compels people with more many and self-importance than actual sense 
to create computer science scholarships which explicitly state: "No, 
you're not eligible *because* you're a man." Funny thing, I've never 
seen a scholarship that had a rule against women. And yet somehow 
programming is allegedly full of women-hating men? Fucking crock of shit.
Mar 17 2014
next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 7:02 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 ...people with more many and self-importance...


s/many/money/

Every notice how typos are significantly more embarrassing in a rant? ;)
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent 1100110 <0b1100110 gmail.com> writes:
On 3/17/14, 18:02, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 6:33 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 22:15:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 3/17/2014 11:50 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 The pervasive sexism in our profession is a serious problem, and should


 Pervasive sexism in programming? What a complete crock of shit.


 And all these pull request we rejected because they were made by women ?
 HA! See!

 Oh wait...


 Exactly, right!

 People see that software development is predominately male, and they
 assume "Oh, it *MUST* be because those EVIL, SEXIST men are TRYING to
 keep women out!" That genuinely pisses me off, what the hell is this,
 1920? When people actually *wanted* to join men's clubs and such
 post-college fraternities? For f...*couch*..."freaks" sake, one of the
 things I hate MOST about software dev is that it's such a saus...is that
 it's all guys.

 There's only one kind of sexism in this profession, and that's the kind
 that compels people with more many and self-importance than actual sense
 to create computer science scholarships which explicitly state: "No,
 you're not eligible *because* you're a man." Funny thing, I've never
 seen a scholarship that had a rule against women. And yet somehow
 programming is allegedly full of women-hating men? Fucking crock of shit.


I agree with your sentiment.
Mar 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 23:02:13 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 People see that software development is predominately male, and 
 they assume "Oh, it *MUST* be because those EVIL, SEXIST men 
 are TRYING to keep women out!" That genuinely pisses me off, 
 what the hell is this, 1920? When people actually *wanted* to


As a student I taught introductory courses in programming. There 
was a reasonable number of females because they needed the course 
for biology etc. I think the programming talent was fairly evenly 
distributed. But your average female student value belonging to a 
group of other females so when the ratio fall below a threshold 
only the determined, tomboyish, selfconfident or very smart 
females will persist. And my impression is that they tend to 
gravitate either towards the social side of IT or towards the 
mathematical side, but fewer go for the "tinkering" fields?

Of course, among the males the "tinkerers" start out in their 
nerdy teens in social boyish groups. So they have a five year+ 
head start. Female teens will have problem accessing those groups 
if they don't have a nerdy big brother who is kind or a very 
nerdy dad… Are teenagers sexist? Of course…


 rule against women. And yet somehow programming is allegedly 
 full of women-hating men? Fucking crock of shit.


Yeah, but programming is full of awkward teenage boys who lock 
themselves up in their basements where the girls cannot find 
them. ;-)
Mar 18 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/18/2014 12:20 PM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang gmail.com>" wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 23:02:13 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 People see that software development is predominately male, and they
 assume "Oh, it *MUST* be because those EVIL, SEXIST men are TRYING to
 keep women out!" That genuinely pisses me off, what the hell is this,
 1920? When people actually *wanted* to


 As a student I taught introductory courses in programming. There was a
 reasonable number of females because they needed the course for biology
 etc. I think the programming talent was fairly evenly distributed. But
 your average female student value belonging to a group of other females
 so when the ratio fall below a threshold only the determined, tomboyish,
 selfconfident or very smart females will persist. And my impression is
 that they tend to gravitate either towards the social side of IT or
 towards the mathematical side, but fewer go for the "tinkering" fields?


Yea, there's always been one or two women in almost any computer science 
class or programming team I've been in. I've never taken a programming 
course that was required for people outside the CS major, although from 
what I remember of the "intro to programming" tutoring I did, there does 
tend to be a...less uneven...mix in the introductory courses.

In any case, there's definitely a "group effect" regardless of gender. 
Men do become nurses these days, but most people who pursue nursing are 
still women. And yet, I've never heard of anything actually trying to 
keep nursing a "women's club".

I suspect that some people misinterpret their own natural, often 
subconscious, apprehension towards entering a "predominantly different 
from me" group as being "They don't want me there."

And then sometimes they may try to over-compensate for that, which in 
and of itself can be rather off-putting to other people (perhaps 
triggering a negative feedback cycle?)



 Of course, among the males the "tinkerers" start out in their nerdy
 teens in social boyish groups. So they have a five year+ head start.
 Female teens will have problem accessing those groups if they don't have
 a nerdy big brother who is kind or a very nerdy dad… Are teenagers
 sexist? Of course…


Heh, teenagers can be all sorts of unsavory adjectives ;) I was quite 
uncomfortable around teens back when I was one - many of them were 
real...well, better not to finish that thought.

Ehh, but it's true of adults, too. The local public libraries around 
here intentionally segregate off the teenagers (which is asinine in and 
of itself) citing concerns over noise. And yet, I've been a *very* 
frequent patron of those libraries for several years and the *only* 
people I've ever seen failing to grasp the whole "library == quiet" 
notion were middle-aged. One of them was even some upper-manager for the 
very library he was loudly blathering on in. Even more bizarre was the 
nature of his noise: He was very loudly boasting how he'd arranged the 
library so that the noisy teenagers were shoved off into a remote 
corner. And yet, at no point had I ever come across noisy teens there 
despite, for several years, being regularly there (including visiting 
the "teen" section because that's where the library decided manga 
belongs) twice a week at exactly the time of day when teenage traffic 
was at a peak. The teenagers: Dead silent. Various parents: "BLAH BLAH 
BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!"

And then I see people carefully whispering in bookstores, or order 
"Mc"Nuggets at Wendy's, etc, and loose all hope for humanity...


 rule against women. And yet somehow programming is allegedly full of
 women-hating men? Fucking crock of shit.


 Yeah, but programming is full of awkward teenage boys who lock
 themselves up in their basements where the girls cannot find them. ;-)


Hmm, something about that sounds very familiar...almost as if I know 
someone...someone I know very, *VERY* well who...oh wait...nevermind. ;)
Mar 19 2014
prev sibling parent "Asman01" <jckj33 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:47:07 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Namespace <rswhite4 googlemail.com> wrote:

 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


 I guess at a certain age people lose their sense of humor.


I don't think so. And I do agree to Walter.
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Rikki Cattermole" <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 10:31:54 UTC, Namespace wrote:

 On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 09:18:43 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/17/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some 
 locker room
 jokes
 that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


 Where? Any specific threads?


 I think he means the "dlang.sexy" thread.


The thread itself was quite appropriate as it was a genuine 
opportunity for D. However a few people made a couple adult 
related jokes here.
I just personally think that while we shouldn't ban certain 
subjects out right, we just need to be careful of how we approach 
it. I.e. don't joke about it, if it needs to be commented upon do 
so.

At the end of the day we are here to program. Not to tell jokes 
that high schoolers would laugh at.

Perhaps we need to create a community standard guidelines related 
to this? That way if another thread or messages that are over the 
top we just link them to it. After all, lets learn and evolve 
from mistakes. Its what we are good at!
Mar 17 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 3:55 AM, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

 Perhaps we need to create a community standard guidelines related to this?


The difference between porn and art has defied all attempts at writing a 
bureaucratic rule defining it, yet we all know which is which when we see it.

I.e. just use good judgement.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 2:31 PM, Walter Bright wrote:

 The difference between porn and art has defied all attempts at writing a
 bureaucratic rule defining it, yet we all know which is which when we
 see it.


That categorizational difficulty only exists because "porn" and "erotic 
art" realistically *are* the same thing, the only difference is the 
speaker's positive/negative spin and the compulsion of certain factions 
in the art world to feel ethically insulated from the works of the less 
"artsy" factions.
Mar 17 2014
parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Nick Sabalausky:


 That categorizational difficulty only exists because "porn" and 
 "erotic art" realistically *are* the same thing, the only 
 difference is the speaker's positive/negative spin and the 
 compulsion of certain factions in the art world to feel 
 ethically insulated from the works of the less "artsy" factions.


Despite them being not always easy to tell apart, it doesn't mean 
they are the same thing. In your brain there are several 
different subsystems designed for different purposes, and "porn" 
and "erotic art" don't stimulate the same areas, despite they 
have some common traits. This can even be measured experimentally 
with brain imaging since many years.

Bye,
bearophile
Mar 17 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 6:49 PM, bearophile wrote:

 Nick Sabalausky:


 That categorizational difficulty only exists because "porn" and
 "erotic art" realistically *are* the same thing, the only difference
 is the speaker's positive/negative spin and the compulsion of certain
 factions in the art world to feel ethically insulated from the works
 of the less "artsy" factions.


 Despite them being not always easy to tell apart, it doesn't mean they
 are the same thing. In your brain there are several different subsystems
 designed for different purposes, and "porn" and "erotic art" don't
 stimulate the same areas, despite they have some common traits. This can
 even be measured experimentally with brain imaging since many years.


That doesn't imply there's an inherent difference, only that most people 
interpret a difference. In both cases, it's a visual stimulus (ie "art", 
as if "art" even had a real definition at all) that's erotically-themed. 
I think it's entirely reasonable to argue that the differences in brain 
activity relate more to whether an individual person subconsciously (or 
consciously) chooses to view a piece for artistic purposes or 
for...other...purposes.

It's not at all difficult see that a single work, whether "porn" or 
"erotic art", can easily lead two different viewers, or even *be* led by 
the viewers themselves, to *either* mental reaction. This very strongly 
suggests that the distinction has little to do with the work itself.

Furthermore, it could easily be argued (and I suspect many would) that 
burring, if not destroying, the lines between "sexual" and "respectable" 
is a major part of the whole point behind "erotic art". Interesting to 
note, then, how closely this parallels the increasingly mainstream 
acceptance of porn. That sounds to me like very strong evidence that 
we're not examining two different things at all, but rather looking at 
one-and-the-same thing from two different vantage points and *choosing* 
to interpret them differently (and yes, interpreting something 
differently is naturally going to manifest as a difference in brain 
activity).
Mar 17 2014
prev sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/17/2014 12:03 AM, Walter Bright wrote:

 I'd hoped I'd never have to post this. There have been some locker room
 jokes that continued even after I asked it be stopped.


FWIW, either I completely missed the posts with the locker room jokes, 
or else the problem was that none of the authors of whatever posts are 
in question suspected their posts would be viewed as locker room jokes.
Mar 17 2014