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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #267795

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

From Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP
Date 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
Message-ID <Ib8GS-coOt-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <IaHnk-c7s9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaKbv-c9eM-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaQ7f-cd3j-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <IaQqB-cdaC-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <Ib8xb-coK2-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 09:17:15AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 2/24/24, Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 01:35:14PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> >> I wrote:
> >> > You seem by now to have ignored multiple messages where it was made
> >> > clear that the work was already done.
> >>
> >> Assuming we care about the most rapid healing possible for those who
> >> are actually triggered by certain words in one or another language,
> >> there is a valid position to consider that is to increase, not
> >> decrease, exposure to and therefore the broader usage of, triggering
> >> words.
> >>
> >> If we care about healing wounds, we ought not remove the catalysts to
> >> that healing.
> >
> > I did wonder how long it would take for someone to go from, "it's
> > terrible that you activists are MAKING someone do this POINTLESS
> > non-technical work!" to "no one should use this thing someone did in
> > their own free time because it's bad, actually, for non-technical
> > reasons!"
> 
> Except "no one should use this thing someone did in their own free
> time because it's bad, actually, for non-technical reasons!" is not
> what I said.

Oh, okay. So what is it exactly about what the developers of the
teaming driver have done with regard to not using so-called
"non-inclusive terminology" that you consider to have been a
mistake?

I thought that was the exact topic of conversation here, and the
above was you saying that it shouldn't be removed but should in fact
be left there as some sort of "shock treatment" but apparently I
have misunderstood you.

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

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