Re: technical terms overhaul
On 20-06-2020 23:57, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Weaver wrote:
>> On 20-06-2020 12:57, Dan Ritter wrote:
>> > Weaver wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I think it's possible to get too politically correct.
>> >
>> > Try this phrase:
>> >
>> > "I think it's possible to get too polite."
>>
>> No, there's no value in twisting words.
>> The wrong connotation gets promoted.
>
> I have yet to see a use of the term "political correctness" in
> modern speech -- say, since 1990 -- that did not mean "people
> are being polite and I don't want them to be polite".
>
> I'm open to correction if you have real-world examples.
Perhaps it's just your perception that needs adjusting?
>> No insult was intended or implied.
>> You prefer to see it way.
>
> My ancestors were enslaved. If you didn't intend an insult,
> you were not communicating clearly.
Yes, it's your perception, alright!
I've been exposed to what is referred `politely' as `reverse-rascism'
It's not a one way street.
>> >> Why are we attaching a concept like skin colour to list names as a
>> >> serious proposition?
>> >
>> > Exactly. Since it doesn't matter to you, why not be polite?
>>
>>
>> See how you've created a straw man to tear down by adjusting the
>> terminology?
>> Obviously it does or I wouldn't have posted.
>> I always ask questions and never impose my standards on others.
>> See the difference?
>
> I know what sea-lioning is.
>
> https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sea-lioning
No, you didn't see the difference.
Stop imposing your standards on others.
There it is, stated directly.
Now try to deal with it.
Your whole twisting of technical terminologies to assume personal
offence is adequate statement of your own problem.
When pointed out, a mature human being does something about it, not
simply transfer the load onto others.
--
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.
— Lucius Annæus Seneca.
Terrorism, the new religion.
Registered Linux User: 554515
Reply to: