[NoZebra120vClip]

Not only that, but there are a number of terms which are "updated" on a regular basis because they inevitably take on a derogatory connotation and must be euphemized repeatedly. I feel that this is often unreasonable political correctness.

In fact, it's a non-Inclusive practice. One effect of updating the language is that you exclude people of a certain generation. So you can identify and out and then segregate people based on the terminology they use. Are you familiar with "shibboleths"? Happens all the time.

What the IETF is doing here is creating shibboleths for the next generation of IT professionals to separate themselves from the previous generation, who may not be careful enough to update our language.

[zimpenfish]

> One effect of updating the language is that you exclude people of a certain generation.

Your argument is that making language more inclusive is, in fact, exclusionary because people of certain generations are, presumably, incapable of updating their language and thus will continue to go around saying the old, exclusionary things and thus being shunned by the younger generations?

Do you not want to think about that for a bit and consider how utterly ludicrous in sounds in the face of, y'know, reality?

[NoZebra120vClip]

Excerpts from Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky:

3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy"

4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

8. "Keep the pressure on."

11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."

13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."