[keerthiko]

It is the prerogative of the nation and its people to choose official naming for international usage. If India, like Myanmar (formerly Burma) wanted to choose a native name as their English representation through a formal process, it is disrespectful bordering on hostile to ignore that, especially as a foreign entity like YC. Nobody is saying anyone should change any names, but once they have, it is important it is respected.

This is a complicated initiative, but it's clear that most people do not recognize the impact or meaning of a choice like this. It is considered equally hostile and rude to, for example:

- refer to a divorcee by their ex family name after an official name change

- refer to a transgender person by the name they had previously after an official name change

It's up to the individual what their name is, and making a name official is clearly indicating what they would like to be referred to. It really shouldn't be that much trouble for outside entities to respect that.

[srean]

Its been 70 years since the British left, if these were important issues that people thought strongly about it would have come up sooner. This rather recent renaming agenda should be called out for what it is -- a convenient and manufactured political diversion to draw attention away form the governments failings and lackluster performance.

Many of these cities/towns indeed had pre-British names but for better or for worse, its the British that made them into the cities that they are, for example Calcutta, it was 3 not very notable villages prior to the British.

The argument for renaming will carry a lot more heft if these were notable names prior to the British. In some cases they were but not all.

[sumedh]

> but once they have, it is important it is respected.

No I dont agree, I still call Mumbai as Bombay most of the times because that was the city I grew up in.

I think its disrespectful to the people of Bombay/Bangalore that the govt wastes money changing names instead of fixing actual issues

[keerthiko]

You have said this in 4+ places in this thread. People who have strong connections with the place (similarly with a person who's name has changed) can use their discretion which name to use, if the person in question is alright with either name. However it is inappropriate for an outsider to use an unofficial name or deadname without permission, especially in official context. That's all I have said.

Please stop bringing up taxpayer money, it's not like taxes can only be used for a singular issue at once. I could say the US taxes shouldn't be spending trillions on military before fixing other problems like homelessness in SF, but that's not how taxes or governments work.

[sumedh]

> However it is inappropriate for an outsider to use an unofficial name or deadname without permission

I dont think its inappropriate, that is how names change over time. Just embrace it, dont fight it.

> Please stop bringing up taxpayer money

Why? Shouldnt you say something if the govt is wasting money on frivolous activities?

> I could say the US taxes shouldn't be spending trillions on military before fixing other problems like homelessness in SF, but that's not how taxes or governments work.

I agree, the US should be spending less on military and more on the welfare of its citizens.

[kranner]

> However it is inappropriate for an outsider to use an unofficial name or deadname without permission, especially in official context.

I don’t see a single reason why it is inappropriate, other than it offending you. Nobody needs permission to use words from anybody else. If anything is offensive, it is this type of gatekeeping.

Keep carrying on like this with talk of how outsiders should behave, and Bangalore will lose the competitive advantage it enjoys as IT workers will find friendlier places to move to.