Hacker News Reader

Comment by diskzero | Hacker News Reader

One may choose to participate in normalizing terms that have origins that may offend. This happens frequently and often times we are unaware of the offensive origins of terms until it is pointed out. You may decide to continue to use the term and ignore them or you may choose to listen to their objections. Some may call this virtue signalling, or cancel culture or any other number of terms.

I am not the language police and I am not going to "cancel" this Show HN for the use of what I consider an offensive term. I am an investor and an advisor, so my advice is to not use that term. I feel that it is juvenile and shows a lack of concern. You may disagree and point towards normalizing behavior (MTV, evolving slang, etc.) as your justification.

My philosophy is why bother to offend if you can avoid it. I also will fight for your right to be offensive. But I won't invest in your startup or star your Github repo.

View on HN

> My philosophy is why bother to offend if you can avoid it.

Implying saying something someone might find offensive requires active intent.

OP clearly isn't trying to be offensive. It's ethically wrong to imply, suggest, or act as if they are. The commenter doesn't like the word pimp, and wants others to feel the same distaste they're afflicted by. What the OP intended to do is irrelevant.

More directly why bother to offend if you cant help it. Because someone will happily take offense to anything. So to avoid it would mean not interacting at all. Which is exactly why we can't have nice things. OP is trying to be nice sharing something they feel is useful. Only to be be accosted with the accusation they're intentionally trying to be offensive. If you're going to make something someone will find useful, and it only costs some offense to someone trying to find a way to feel offensive, you then try to cause offence.

I am not sure I understand your point about intent. I do agree that the OP did not intend to offend. My input to the Show HN is that I found the term juvenile and offensive. The OP may choose to accept my advice or disregard it. I am not judging them, only providing some input.

Yes, people can choose to take offense at anything. There isn't much we can do about that. In my own interactions, there are certain words and phrases I choose not to use. This works for me, doesn't harm others and generally improves my quality of life.

We exist in a world of many intersecting values and beliefs. We navigate through them in differing ways. There is room for many differing points of view, although recent events make it seem like this is a less viable belief.

Back the the OP, this is a Show HN. My input is I think the name is lame. I won't censor, down vote, blacklist or otherwise assign any other intent.

My response to yours was in the context of the original comment from redwoolf. I don't think you were virtue signaling, I do think redwoolf was. Your comments were very clear you're offering your view point. And I agree with you, it's a weak name that nearly any other option could improve. But you didn't go off on an unrelated tangent about an irrelevant separate context. The other commenter did go off on a tangent, and that's why they're catching flack. And why we're arguing about language instead of README's. The problem from my interpretation is 'blaming' OP for a context they're not trying to envoke.

Got it. I just wanted to make sure I didn't misunderstand you. This type of dialog is really valuable to me. As I stated elsewhere, something has happened in general that makes rational discussion difficult.

This argues in bad faith and is escalatory. No need to die on "pimp" hill.

The comment expressing dislike for the name didn't accuse or say anything about intentional offensiveness, only that they felt it wasn't appropriate in a professional setting. "Someone will happily take offense to anything" isn't true but many commenters have expressed dislike for this particular name. Nobody's coming for the words "bread" or "computer" anytime soon.

"Beautify my readme" or "glow up my readme" would convey the same meaning without the unnecessary sex trade connotation. That would let the work be shared in professional settings and put off fewer people, both positives! Charitably, the original author may not have considered negative connotations for the name. At least now they know it's not universally beloved.

I'm happy to die on "pimp" hill. Not because I care about the project name, or the word. I don't have strong feelings about either.

> The comment expressing dislike for the name didn't accuse or say anything about intentional offensiveness, only that they felt it wasn't appropriate in a professional setting.

Their comment includes a rant about sexual exploitation. By it's nature as a comment directed at the OP, implies it's relevant to the name of the project. The best interpretation I was able to come up with is they thought OP didn't know, and thought it was important to point out that the word pimp is 'bad in their opinion'. diskzero's reply is a perfect counter example, they're careful to speak to the reasons objectively. Observing vs complaining (admittedly what I read as complaining.)

> "Someone will happily take offense to anything" isn't true but many commenters have expressed dislike for this particular name. Nobody's coming for the words "bread" or "computer" anytime soon.

But it is true, I can cite plenty of examples of people not being allowed to do cool things because someone complained. It's great that no ones' coming for bread or computer. But I already have so few words, I'm not willing to let anyone "come for" any of them. not even the ones I think are stupid. Not now, and not after soon, however big soon is.

(to be clear I don't think that's what anyone is trying to do, only that It is a hill worth dying on)

> would convey the same meaning

Disagree, as clearly did the author.

There are many contributors to the human trafficking industry, but an obscure github project that references an old MTV show isn't one of them.

Your philosophy is sensible, but policing vocabulary at this point is premature optimisation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com