[ThrowawayBandit]

This is a ridiculous and sad move. We are living in 1984 a bit more every day.

Master/slave was chosen on purpose because it is very clear, clearer than the alternative you suggest, and is no more offending that using Knight, gladiator, etc.

Sometimes we must realise that an issue lies with the people who are offended by anything and everything, not with what offends them.

[lowmagnet]

The language of 1984 was meant to euphemize to the point of inverted meaning.

Master/slave hasn't made sense since consensus algorithms came on the scene and started "taking leadership"

[ThrowawayBandit]

A consensus algorithm isn't master/slave hence the different terminology.

Master/slave is a very clear analogy and is used extensively for example about hardware interfaces.

The point here is the same as in 1984. It is aimed at suppressing 'incorrect' thoughts. It is totalitarian and we see society moving that way more and more.

[belltaco]

Changing some terminology is totalitarian and oppressive? Give me a break.

[manigandham]

Language is expression and offense is subjective. Forcing people to change their language is bordering on totalitarian control and is usually followed by compounding changes and eventually physical force. This is a single software project but it's the same when scaled up to an entire state.

There are a million terms that have negative connotations but are used in technical jargon. It would be endless to account for them all in case someone somewhere finds it disagreeable.

It's much more logical to ask why 0.1% of people are taking offense and seem to draw such stretched interpretations rather than asking 99.9% of people to change for them.