Hacker News Reader

Comment by itisit | Hacker News Reader

Your docs use the term "master" in regards to AWS accounts in some places [0]. FWIW many companies, AWS included, prefer alternate words for various reasons [1]. You may want to match the language for clarity.

[0] https://docs.vantage.sh/connecting/

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/organizations/latest/userguide/o...

View on HN

Thanks for this call-out. I'll personally get this updated this evening.

That was a pretty fast cave to Western political correctness manure. Missed opportunity for a CEO to show some backbone.

That's not constructive. Please refrain from attacks like this on HN. AWS Organizations is changing the name of the “master account” to “management account”. It makes sense for OP to update their docs accordingly, to remain consistent with AWS's naming system.

Objectively speaking, it may not seem constructive if you disagree with the statement. I have no skin in this game, and the change doesn't bother me. I do however, understand the sentiment from a non-western cultural and societal perspective, as I work with a veritable United Nations on a daily basis. Until AWS completely scrubs the language in question from their ecosystem, for example [1], I can see how that call out is misconstrued as being in the spirit of "political correctness" from another's perspective.

I believe you missed an opportunity to engage in good faith conversation with information that could have turned their perspective towards something more positive in nature. As such, I view your reply as not constructive.

[1] https://awscli.amazonaws.com/v2/documentation/api/latest/ref...

The top level post asks to change it for political reasons not to match new aws changes which would make sense. Trying to shutdown discussion by saying this wasn't constructive is not something HN supports and I would ask you to refrain from doing that. The fact that previously neutral words are now negative words is fair game. Perhaps they were never neutral words. Let's discuss, not dismiss.

> The top level post asks to change it for political reasons not to match new aws changes which would make sense.

Not quite. I didn’t actually ask for the wording to be changed. At the very least (and primarily), it’s a term AWS is retiring, and a company like Vantage whose service is entirely based off AWS (for now) is wise to keep parity. That I alluded to companies having reasons for updating certain words is relevant and useful. And I leave it unsaid as to what the reasons are and whether they’re justified because that’s up to the Vantage CEO if there’s further merit beyond syncing docs to make the change.

So calling out a non-substantial change designed to satisfy the bottom-feeders of the industry is “attacking”? Nice try guy.

Putting the political implications aside for just a second,

Why would a company whose product is directly built on top of AWS have their documentation not use the same terminology?

Agreed. Who, exactly, are we serving with this change? The folks with an insatiable appetite for white knighting?

Best way to handle situations like this is to not reply. You're not going to appease the far-left social activists and the right wing culture warriors in any situation. You can't lose if you don't play. Just update docs silently to be consistent with Amazon and stay mission-focused.

Agreed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com