Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #267716

Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP

From Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP
Date 2024-02-23 13:20 +0100
Message-ID <IaCGZ-c4AT-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <IaeEF-bPT3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaAlQ-c33W-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaCdX-c4b5-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Am 23.02.2024 schrieb Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de>:

> If there's a single person in the world who feels existing
> terminology to hurt them, I consider my usage of such terms.

Everytime there is somebody who doesn't like something.
I mostly care about technology and not the feelings a small amount of
users has.
It is free software - everybody can create a fork and change the stuff.

> If it makes one person feel better, I think I did something good.

I simply don't care about those feelings.

> If it makes others feel worse, I have to balance arguments. Arguments 
> such as "it was always thus" or "it's too much effort" are not strong
> ones.

The amount of work needed to change it is of course a really strong
argument because there need to be people who are willing to change it
and spend their time on it.
The technical gain of that is exactly zero, it doesn't solve any bug,
it doesn't add a feature, it doesn't make it easier to use, it simply
makes some tiny amount of users feel better.

> As it happens, I prefer being called "woke" above being rude.

Feel free to do so. I like the freedom in free software, so everybody
can create software without "problematic" terms.

> Oh, and tech and culture can not be separated, but that's probably
> also a loaded topic.

It cannot be completely separated because there is a language that is
being used and that language is part of a political discussion.

Although, it doesn't mean that a developers needs to change something.

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-22 11:40 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 07:10 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 10:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 11:00 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-23 11:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 19:30 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-14 19:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 01:50 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-03-15 09:50 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 17:10 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-03-15 17:20 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:30 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Will Mengarini <seldon@eskimo.com> - 2024-03-15 19:20 +0100
            Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be  a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-03-15 20:00 +0100
              Re: Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to  be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for  network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 23:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 21:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de> - 2024-02-23 12:50 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 13:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 13:40 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2024-02-25 00:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Roger Price <roger@rogerprice.org> - 2024-02-23 11:50 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:40 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 17:30 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2024-02-23 19:10 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Gremlin <scott-andrews@columbus.rr.com> - 2024-02-23 19:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 21:00 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 20:00 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 12:30 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP jeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 12:40 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 14:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2024-02-24 15:10 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-24 18:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-24 19:40 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-25 10:30 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 10:40 +0100
                Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 10:50 +0100
                Re: Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 13:20 +0100
                Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 22:40 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 01:50 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:10 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-25 12:30 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 13:00 +0100
                Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of  master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 02:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-14 18:00 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-24 21:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-25 00:30 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 00:50 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:40 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2024-02-23 16:00 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:50 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 22:20 +0100
          Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 03:40 +0100
            Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 04:00 +0100
              Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
                Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
    Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
      Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:30 +0100
        Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network  bonding/LACP Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2024-02-23 22:40 +0100
  Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 20:40 +0100

csiph-web