Rename GTFO to GOAWAY
github.com
github.com
With that out of the way, the pearl-clutching about the word "fuck" and how unprofessional it is irritates me. We have this weird notion that it's OK for us to curse individually but that there's this wider world out there that hates cursing. I don't think that's true and we should stop acting like it is. More generally, I think this almost arbitrary division of professional vs unprofessional things [1] does a big disservice to actual differences in professionalism like courtesy, personal responsibility, and reliability. "If you follow these silly rules, you can pretend to be an adult!"
[1] Joel Spolsky has a great essay about this that I wasn't immediately able to find. It mentioned, among other things, how silly it is that the smell of popcorn is said to be "unprofessional".
I've heard a lot of foreigners (especially people from nordic countries or germany) speaking English in a way that is a lot ruder than they might realize. One thing is the personality (they seem to be more direct), but there have been many instances where it's obvious they aren't aware that the language they're using is way too strong for their situation. This goes doubly so if your main English education is internet forums.
Not saying that it's a reason to remove GTFO, but the humor (which is slightly in the very exaggerated vocabulary, which seems to be misinterpreted as a strong intent) is probably lost in translation.
Different contexts call for different language and tone of voice. I don't think cursing is a special case in this regard; it's just that it is by definition harsh and forceful and informal and thus does not belong in formal language like standard documents.
But use whatever language you want. At the end of the day, you don't have to be considerate, but they don't have to consider you professional.
Not that being unprofessional is always a big deal. Lots of people and companies are very successful without being considered professional.
The reason why I do feel comfortable swearing is because people actually don't have their feelings damaged or hurt by it.
The reason I don't insult people is because people actually do have their feelings hurt by it.
The reason I don't use misogynistic or racist language (this notably includes a few choice "swear words") is because people actually do have their feelings hurt by it.
Three of these are rational taboos because people actually are bothered by them. The other is an irrational taboo, a relic that use to be rational but hasn't been for decades. Not using the word "fuck" is on the same level as wearing a tie to work, there is no remaining reason to do it outside of tradition. Not chewing with your mouth open, or not using misogynistic swear words, is more on the level of putting on underwear and pants before going to work. You do it for the benefit of others, not solely out of tradition.
I would be disciplined as a child for saying that something was stupid or dumb, but it's not like those words bothered my parents. As an adult, when I talk to them I casually use profanity in a variety of cases, and so do they.
Of course if I used profanity directed at them in an insulting manner, they would be upset (as would most people), but that is a reaction to an insult, not the words that were used for the insult.
But besides that, it really doesn't matter if the offense is irrational. It's irrational to freak out at people for one puff of second-hand smoke (assuming no allergies). That doesn't make it any less rude to smoke in peoples' faces.
OK. How about this? Putting a not-germane political rant (Ron Paul, Tea Party, Occupy, ...take your pick) in the documentation of your library is also unprofessional. It doesn't hurt anyone, but it needlessly causes friction and annoys people for no real gain. It's not strictly wrong (in a moral or ethical sense), but it's certainly not professional.
Second hand smoke smells. That is an actual reason to not blow smoke into somebodies face, it isn't just tradition.
Putting weird political rants into your documentation would presumably not serve a purpose. The word fuck, despite your disapproval of it, has versatile meaning and can be used in a variety of ways in general speech. If you want a political equivalent, it would be like referencing luddism in documentation. Luddism, originally referring to a specific political movement, has long since transcended its literal connotations. It would not be considered particularly bizarre to use the word "luddism" or "Luddite" in documentation.
On the ridiculous notion of "unnecessary": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM#t=105
Hi, I'm part of the world you don't believe exists. I don't curse, the people I work with don't curse, the vast majority of my friends don't curse, and I've never heard a relative curse. It's not OK to be offensive just because you don't believe that there are people whose vocabulary is cleaner than yours.
It is just that I experience joy when I find little things like GTFO in the world which not only make sense in their context but have a bit of humor. So I guess I just disagree with the idea that standards should not contain anything crass.
Also I have a question concerning the 4th point as I am admittedly unfamiliar with the HTTP 2.0 spec.
"GTFO, if it really stands for "General Termination of Future Operations," has a surprising definition and may produce confusion. We should strive for absolute clarity above all else in editorial changes."
Can someone elaborate on what the confusion it would produce would be?
The fact that someone suggested a corresponding "HTTP TITS" should set off at least minor warning bells that "HTTP GTFO" is not a good thing to put in the standard. I certainly don't want to see HTTP LOL (Long Overdue Listen), HTTP WAT (Wireless Ask Transmit), etc.
Humor is great, but good standards are better.
Edit: To further clarify I mean surprise about what it stands for when both interpretations convey a similar idea.
Considering the general highlevel meaning of "get the fuck out" and "General Termination of Future Operations" in the context of this protocol is the same, is it really going to harm anybodies understanding of the standard? Worse case scenario, people know what it does, but are surprised that it is an acronym for something "SFW".
> Also consider non-native English speakers, which is really important when developing international standards.
Is the concern here that they will not be familiar with the typical "internet meaning" of GTFO? They might not get the joke, but I don't see how that would harm their understanding of the standard. They'll read about GTFO, learn that it means "General Termination of Future Operations", learn what that means, and they'll be good to go. Just because they don't get a chuckle out of it doesn't mean that their ability to work with it is impeded.
My favorite example of professional tool fun has to be the "Cowardly refusing to create an empty directory" result in tar (http://erictarn.com/post/393019949/tar-cowardly-refusing-to-...). That adverb adds a lot of character and justification to the message.
Well I mean, I hate when that happens, but the message is great.
Question: “What was it called?”
Dennis Ritchie: "Well, the second letter was different"
Ergo, "Oh Fsck!"
No reason, just looked right. Plus my manager probably wouldn't like me saying things like "I just need to fuck this disk really quick."
It's more a matter of decorum.
Edit: I recognize that there are those who would like to load more connotations onto the term, but I think that even the above definition is just a bunch of marketing fluff promulgated by those who stand to benefit from people believing that they'll get a better result from paying someone to do something rather than doing it themselves.
(I really wanted to close with a saying along the lines of "one man's politically-correct bullshit is another person's basic standard of human decency", but I saw somebody say this - or something very much like it - once on HN, and it was followed up by a comment from somebody complaining that this level of politically-correct nonsense was infringing on his fundamental immutable human right not to be implicitly compared to something inhuman. Which I suppose is fair enough. And I certainly wouldn't want anybody to feel oppressed.)
As far as your saying goes - fair enough. The problem with total freedom, however, is that it's sort of an idealism. Now, I'm an idealistic kind of guy, but I realize that the idea is contradictory. Your freedom to feel "decent" infringes upon my freedom to drop my favorite dirty words in front of you, and vice-versa (though personally I don't give a fuck about being "made to feel inhuman").
So, what do we do?
Excluding people who "care on the behalf of people who might care" ("we shouldn't do this, not because it offends me, but because it may offend others"), is anybody actually bothered by the word "fuck"?
Well I mean, also excluding isolated religious communities in Lancaster county that still use minced oaths....
Oh, STFU.
Seriously, though, I see the point. I'm kinda torn on issues likes this. On one hand, language in a standard, particularly as it relates to implemented messages, should meet some minimum level of decorum and avoid colloquialisms. On the other hand, stuffy language battles are pointless and distract from the primary goal of releasing a usable standard with usable error messages. On this particular issue I lean towards the former winning out.
Edit: someone else mentioned the word I was trying to think of.
GOAWAY makes plenty sense when compared to GTFO, assuming that not everyone who learns of it intentionally is well-versed in that of which GTFO is a relatively smaller part. Grandma wouldn't necessarily get GTFO (right away, anyway) but she would likely pick up GOAWAY in a snap.
Of course, the above assumes a section of people who are fluent (enough?) in English to grok the spec.
EDIT: Grammerr.
EDIT: Clarification in response to Vonmoltke.
English profanity has a tendency to be better understood by other languages and countries than the appropriate western vernacular.
I like this stuff. It reminds me that humans with a sense of humor build the things we use everyday, and not some emotionless robot.
Having said that, people do get upset about 0xDEADBEEF and 0xCAFEBABE, those people need to get lives. Or come up with some other words using only 6 letters.
I'll wager someone out there, perhaps unwittingly, has 0xDEADBABE in their binary, God help them if the twitterati finds out.
If you are have no public talking experience/training, you are going to loose and be labeled ugly names.
(I realise that's because this isn't a protocol-related issue, only a documentation one, but my argument is that there's no real impact in the change back.)
Agreed, although I got the impression the internet just stopped caring?
There's a lot of stuff out there by comedians about how saying "fuck" is probably the cheapest way to get laughs. It's pretty much cheating. At least saying your server is a teapot is slightly unexpected.
considering what the output is supposed to be, I would think something like PLZSTOP would be slightly better than GOAWAY, but in any case GTFO is not even really funny, kinda wears away at our already limited supply of swear words, and isn't worthy of the high-grade humor that is internet specification humor.
GTFO is less than ideal not because of the F, but because of the association with the "Tits or GTFO" meme.
Seriously, you're no better than the person who sees "brogrammer" when the word "bro" is mentioned. This is such a narrow and ridiculously flawed way of thinking.
And you should avoid swearing, sexuality, and violence like the plague.
[1] http://developer.android.com/reference/android/util/Log.html...
Sure, they shouldn't matter, and it'd be great if we could get past them to actual competence, but not swearing in front of customers or wearing smarter clothing are the kinds of things that make a difference.