Banned Words (Was: RFC: #ubuntu op misuse or not?)

[C de-Avillez]

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Joseph Price <pricechild at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Good Afternoon Carl & thanks for your email.
>
> While you raise many good points, as an Ubuntu op with access in a large
> amount of channels I'm extremely concerned about policies being enforced
> inconsistently. It's been made pretty clear that the d-word is totally off
> limits in some people's opinion.

And I think this is wrong. And -- hoping you will not mind, I will use
"dictator" instead of "d-word". Otherwise I get confused if you meant
"dictator", or "despot", or whatever. Samewise, for the sake of
clarity, I will use full words instead of obfuscated, abbreviated, or
otherwise politically-corrected ones.

Some words carry heavy meaning, *even* when used in a different
context. Swearing, for example (whatever language); but, even then, I
would not block "FUBAR" from being used. Some other words do not.
Dictator is one of them, and examples of it being used in an (for me)
acceptable way have already been given.

Of course, usage of 'dictator' may be improper, if it is an ad hominem attack.

What I think we are missing is mostly to think before reacting. And,
if a moderator action is disputed, to discuss and reach a consensus.

What we would like to have is a congenial atmosphere, where all can
enjoy. I do not think we want laws (at least not in the US view of
laws -- where what is written is what is important, not what was
meant, also called "the letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law").
We have guidelines, and we have leeway to interpret them. Let's keep
them as guidelines and responsibly enjoy our leeway.

>
> It is imperative that we make this policy transparent and communicate it
> clearly to our users using a seamless, holistic approach. For example, is
> the t-word also unacceptable⸮

I do not know what word would be "t-word".

>
> What about abbreviations and obfuscation⸮ Is using 'd-word' acceptable⸮ How
> about 'd*ctator'⸮ Has there bean a CC resolution around force-renaming the
> sab*fl⸮

For me it depends on the context. As I said above, I would *not* block
FUBAR (usage of FUBAR is now common, and acceptable. Expect, perhaps,
when writing a response to a judge).

Now, for a sort of sideways issue. Reading your email I cannot dispel
the feeling of irony permeating it.

Cheers,

..C..