|
|
|
|
|
|
by Tommstein
882 days ago
|
|
|
Whether the review was trolling or a genuine display of being a moron (and in a world where people whined to change "master"/"whitelist"/"blacklist"/etc. for invented bullshit racial reasons, I can easily believe it was actually the latter), whoever posted it should have their reviews banned for demonstrably being worse than useless. |
|
|
Look, I'm not bothered by the names "master" (branch) or "whitelisting" very much, although in the latter case I think allow/deny is a lot more clear. And in the former case, a rational reaction would be to say: I don't care, I won't put effort into renaming branches in existing repositories, but I can recognize that branch in other repositories regardless if it's called "main" or "master". So do what you like. IIRC, that was also the reaction of many reputable OSS maintainers.
That being said: it seems that the review was successful in instilling rage in you.
It explicitly references all these controversies and says "if we do that, shouldn't we also ban the word 'race'"? Doesn't that sound like parody?
And even if not, why not just answer rationally and get on with it?
This is about using words with multiple meanings to incite hate.
I haven't spent any time researching who wrote this original review (which would be a useless way to spend my time), but I'd seriously suggest taking a step back before getting so emotional about it.
This is typical rage-farming troll content. Enganging with it reinforces its message.
And its message, in my view, is not something like "anti-racism". Its message is hate against a strawman. Same as Russia did in the US elections, paying for rage-inciting ads covering all sides (BLM, Trump, Sanders, who cares) to weaken objective discourse.
Not to mention other, similar manipulations of public opinion that "play both sides".
The right way to respond to this would be to answer with the fact that the word "race" is amibigous and flag the review. Fin.