>We are looking for folks that are interested in pushing beyond the status quo to change the way folks interact and use search.
I must have missed the memo on this, but when did “people” become an unacceptable word in corporate communications?
I must have missed the memo on this, but when did “people” become an unacceptable word in corporate communications?
[0] The quote is either Bush, Jr. or Obama.
Oh... And I can't for the life of me imagine how it could be interpreted as more "woke". In fact here in Canada it's kind of a phrase used more by the "right" than the "left"; (it's actually a source of much humour how much this word is overused by Ontario's right wing hockey enforcer barely high school educated 'populist' premier)
3 use the word "folks"
This distinction is often unconscious and absorbed through immersion in social justice circles, similar to how luxury beliefs (such as "defund the police," "trans women are women," etc https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-...) are absorbed.
You have to use that kind of language to signal your belonging to the "elites", and the HR departments that usually write job ads or staff Twitter accounts are full of those type of people. From that it's just propagated everywhere else.
Edit: Congratulation HN on your brilliant policy that prevents me from responding to any of the comments under my post (looks like I got throttled, so editing the post is the only thing I can now do).
Edit: Congratulation HN on your brilliant policy that prevents me from responding to any of the comments under my post (looks like I got throttled, so editing the post is the only thing I can now do).
"So what often happens in political discussions on HN is 1) a person, such as yourself, posts dissenting views in response to several messages, 2) those messages are heavily downvoted by a brigade of users, 3) the person's account is rate-limited or shadowbanned, 4) the brigade freely posts comments against the dissenter because, being many users, each only posting one or two messages, and being of the censorious brigade (the dissenters usually oppose censorship and don't downvote for disagreement--see how even one GitHub user couldn't resist drive-by down-thumbing your comment), their comments don't get downvoted, so they don't get rate-limited.
The end result is, very predictably, a form of mob censorship. And since HN approves of downvoting for disagreement, nothing is done to stop it." https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented/issues...
Though for wokeness, you also run into supporters who say it "doesn't exist", by which they mean it's good (in a "it's just common sense" way).
Also, my post wasn't a criticism of it and I don't even disagree with it (fcvo "it").
So really it’s the anti-“woke” crowd are unable to look at anything without feeling oppressed by the “woke”.
I'm from the south, in the US. Folks is just another way to say people. End of story. The people I've heard use the term "folks" are kind older people with a thick southern drawl. I also hear corporate managers use the term to refer to a group of people. I also hear young adults use it to refer to a group of people...
On second thought, I don't think someone using the term "folks" has ever been used to signal anything more than them referring to a group of people. (Also, I feel like I should mention I'm conservative, and it has never crossed my mind to think somebody using the word folks is "woke" or "antiwoke")
https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folks/
or my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34589768
Once again, that website has nothing of substance. It pulled a couple random quotes from "woke" literature that used the word folks and then made a grand conspiracy about how there's some sort of secret meaning behind the term. The term "folks" is still alive and well everywhere and has no double meaning associated with it whatsoever. What you're doing here is equivalent to what the "woke" did by trying to convince people the OK symbol really means you're a white supremacist[0]. Both of these are delusions, in every sense of the word.
One last thing, if anyone ever tries to convince you there's a grand conspiracy at the top echelons of society, where the elites are actively doing this one thing to control the masses, they're probably deluded. Hanlon's razor typically applies in these cases: never apply to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
[0]: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764728163/the-ok-hand-gesture...
> ends up with males being incarcerated in such prisons
Well, no, those are women. The myth that men use inclusivity to get access to women is just that, a myth, unless you can provide evidence that this is really a common occurence. Obviously violence in prisons needs to be avoided but that's a different topic.