RFC: #ubuntu op misuse or not?

[Melissa Draper]

On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Rohan Dhruva <rohandhruva at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Brian Burger <blurdesign at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Valorie Zimmerman
> > <valorie.zimmerman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Rohan Dhruva <rohandhruva at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > * ops basing ban decisions based on personal prejudice (e.g. towards
> >> > words like blitzkrieg and dictator, drawing conclusions of World War
> >> > II and Hitler)
> >>
> >> Such language is not welcome in an *buntu space. In fact, it is not
> >> welcome anywhere on the Internet, IMO.
> >
> >
> > Based on the IRC log excerpts posted elsewhere in this thread, our
> original
> > poster basically called one of our chanops a Nazi and expected to get
> away
> > with it.
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > No. Just, no.
> >
>
> No. Seriously, no. *Nothing* in the words "dictator" or "blitzkrieg"
> implies *anything* related to Nazism. I can completely understand how
> personal background can lead someone to think that way, but
> immediately jumping to such conclusion is completely hyperbolic. The
> only person originally drawing parallels with anything remotely
> related to German history were the two ops on the channel. Also, I did
> not expect to get away with anything -- if that was my intention, I
> wouldn't have stayed around to discuss or reply here.
>
> There have been dictators before the particular person in question,
> and dictators after him. There are good dictators, and there are bad
> ones. There are people calling themselves benevolent dictators.
>
> A simple search on Google news (http://bit.ly/S2hFaD) shows the word
> "blitzkrieg" being used in many non-offensive contexts. Similarly, the
> word "swastika" can evoke bitter feelings for people in Europe, but
> signifies a religious symbol for Hindus around the world.
>
> Did I use the word Nazi? Sure -- but only after the ops had drawn
> parallels to it. Was I remotely thinking of Germany (or anything
> related to Germany) when using "blitzkrieg"? An emphatic no. The user
> "adamcunnington" and myself tried to explain that dictator does not
> have a Nazi implication in it at all. It is personal choice to be
> offended by those words.
>
> In an international community, you have to understand that words don't
> always mean what you think they mean.
>

The thing about communication is that you don't get to decide how it
impacts other people. You can however improve the effectiveness of future
communication.

Blitzkrieg is a term that has a political background in that its rise to
common use is centred around outsider descriptions of German military
tactics in WWII. It thus has a strong and hurtful meaning to people
affected by that time.

People in general have a bad habit of misappropriating politically charged
words and you're not immune to this. It is entirely possible you didn't
know about the impact of this word, but it has now been explained to to you
why it is improper.

If you truly weren't aware of and it truly isn't your intention to make
people think you're associating them with that regrettable history, then
the proper thing to do now is to stop digging your heels in about your
innocence and instead vow (to yourself if nobody else) to improve your
vocabulary for the future.

I don't believe there is anything more of value that can be added to the
discussion of who said what.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-irc/attachments/20140517/6e9e7982/attachment.html>