>> laissez-faire linguists

I have never heard that word before, but I guess I am one, except for when blockchain has tried a hostile takeover of “crypto”. I’ll fight for that one

I suspect another example of laissez-faire linguists might be the argument over (some) “non-inclusive words”. There were arguments here on HN want the words to move on in their meaning while others want to always connect words to their negative-origins (though some of these connections never actually existed).

I guess I sit in the middle. It depends on the phrase!