re: defining "gimp" 

@rey
Why is it relevant? Was it created at Berkeley? (I don't know, just curious). So, the name is bad because creators were likely to aware it's bad.

Should have Windows Vista been renamed because it's a funny name in Latvian?

My point is, that on the international scale it's likely that a name will mean something less than appropriate for some group of people somewhere on the Earth.

@ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@rey @ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom @hirojin

Also there is a football player Nasri, which in Russian sounds similar to a phrase "go and shit" which actually means "don't give a fuck". It's unrealistic to expect the guy to actually change his name.

The naming issue a freedom of speech issue. We've got a group of people that created something and decided to name it's the way it's named.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin GIMP was intended to have a, well, for lack of a better term, politically incorrect name
after all, it used to be called "the GIMP" for quite a while. you know. after the sex slave character from an internationally famous movie.
and it's not a personal name either. you are drawing false equivalences.

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom
That's a good point.

I want to focus more how the name is perceived, not on it's origin. In this case, I think, to comparisons are relevant.

Languages are powerful. Ambiguity is one of the basic phenomena. "Pussy" will mean different things in a kindergarten and in a high school.

I can't see how outsiders can force the core team to change the name.
@rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin
Which is why the core team sucks. They should listen to people. The very problem is that some people _cannot_ become core members because of the name. (and the attitude of the current core team)

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom

Yes, but this is what they've created the way they wanted. If they don't listen to this argument, it's their choice.

@rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin
True. I hope the fork gains traction.

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom

I see two arguments.

The first is that most of the words are ambiguous and it's meaning is resolved given the context. In IT context, GIMP means an image editor.

@rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

The second is that gimp is toxic speech that hurts people. To make this argument one needs to show that GIMP as a project has enough power to qualify as hate speech.

Follow

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

* "Free Speech in the Digital Age" edited by Susan J. Brison and Katharine Gelber

* "Speech and Harm" edited by Ishani Maitra and Mary Kate McGowan

These two books are good starting point. Lynne Tirrel's work goes in deep details.

re: defining "gimp" 

@grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

I find the argument that the name of a project is hate speech weak, because one needs to show that it has power over the oppressed group.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel Who are you to define the argument. It is that gimp, as a name, is toxic enough to dissuade people from feeling comfortable using or participating in the project. It is exclusionary. (While that isn't directly oppressive, it does play into social structures of oppression, so I find the argument that it facilitates oppression strong, and the argument that isn't oppressive weak.) @grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel Stop flaunting your ability to be rational and be, actually, rational. Listen to what people are saying and, trust that the argument they put forth is the argument they mean? That is, have these conversations in good faith, and respect the people you're trying to have a reasonable conversation with? Not only are you wrong about this issue, but your way of talking about it comes off as juvenile. @grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn
Of you want to go personal, I'm nothing and my opinion doesn't worth anything. I don't use GIMP and neither find it's name offensive.
@grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel I'm not getting personal, I'm telling you: you are misconstruing the argument of those you are disagreeing with. That is a logical fallacy; it's most commonly called "strawmanning;" I forget the latin.

Since we're discussing it personally; I don't use GIMP because people have used that term as a slur toward me and the software name reminds me of it. Beyond that, I don't like letting people who don't respect me make my tools. @grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga @hirojin

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel Since you honestly might not know (in which case you should've stayed quiet and self-educated) here's the (now-deleted) issue: webcache.googleusercontent.com

Note how it doesn't say anything about the name being hate speech. It just says it's an insult, and a colloquial reference to a kink. Other issues are acronyms are hard to remember, and that GIMP doesn't make it clear what the software does! There's four reasons, one about hate speech!

Listen to what people say.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel Like I don't mean to harp on but, come on, if you're gonna engage in online discussions about stuff, do your basic research. That means primary sources, not your inference from reading fifty hot takes. ESPECIALLY if you're butting into a conversation that doesn't involve you.

Doing any less is just... really disrespectful to the people you're talking to; I hope you can see why I say that.

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn
I find the hate speech poimt the most important.

I don't see renaming the project as a universal solution, because of the examples I've provided: Pajero/vista/Nasri/pussy.

I believe that language is powerful enough to minimise the hurt of this name given that we on the day to day basis operate with ambiguous words.

Words to change their meanings, for example the word gay.

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn

I don't defend anyone. I see how the word is problematic, but I don't (yet) see how the core team can be forced to change the name.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel No one is suggesting the can be forced ot change the name. We're just saying they're assholes for how they handled the situation, regardless of their conclusion. Again, you're just... saying that things are the problems that aren't the problems. No one except you is bringing up hate speech as a legal claim to force them to change the name. That's a fictitious agenda you have either been falsely given, or made up.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel At this point you're either ignoring the primary sources or claiming you know better, and either way is, again, a really shitty and disrespectful way to conduct a conversation with someone. You're not right, and you're being an asshole.

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn
Ok, I'm sorry I'm an asshole, and that's my last message.

If it's not hate speech, then the gimp team can do whatever they want and then being assholes is your opinion.

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel And I mean, you're lying. You're saying your not defending anyone, but you're arguing against people bringing up the issue.

If two people are talking and one says "I like blue and red as colors!" and the other says "I think that's hard for colorblind folk to read" and you exclusively debate with the second person about the validity of red and whether there's really room for them to have that preference, and why are they forcing people to change the theme...

re: defining "gimp" 

@pixel Sorry I hit send on this before I saw your notification about that being your last message; I'm not trying to keep talking at you past that point, but I'm honestly not sure what etiquette says I should do at this point; delete this and the message before it or leave it up.

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn @pixel @grainloom @rey @hirojin Note: they aren't doing YOUR tool. They are making a tool and you are allowed to use it.

I understand the argument but I don't have the same experience. I've been called many things (sadly, none good) and I don't hate the words themselves.

re: defining "gimp" 

@emsenn @pixel @grainloom @rey @hirojin That's one of the points I want to understand.

The problem I'm seeing here is people is asking me to trust or to do what they do. I want to understand it. I want to understand also what I would do.
But nobody is interested on that.

re: defining "gimp" 

@ekaitz_zarraga @emsenn @pixel @grainloom @rey @hirojin People are explaining, time and time again, you're just not listening.

listening 

@pettter Nope.
I may be used to a different kind of conversations.

Saying that I'm not listening is also insulting and can feel offended by that and ask you to reword your message.

What is happening here is:
- I don't have an opinion on this
- I want to form one
- As nobody is giving me good arguments like: "i do this for this and it means that because this and that" my position is moving around trying to find them

I still don't have an opinion and still don't have any explanation.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga Let's start with what "this" is, then? Also, what would qualify as a "good argument"?

Because I've seen a lot of people trying in vain to explain a lot of things to you where you have been completely unwilling to accept what they're saying.

listening 

@pettter TBQH, I lost the interest on this bullshit. I've never had it, my original message is from some days ago and the only thing I wanted to do yesterday is to discuss some philosophical stuff with @grainloom (who rejected my invitation LOL).

I don't care.

You *all* can do whatever you like. It's your fucking life and *I'd never call out anyone for doing something I don't like*. Maybe that's why I don't understand.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom > *I'd never call out anyone for doing something I don't like

That's literally what you do you in your first post right back in the start of this whole thread.

listening 

@pettter @grainloom No.
In my post I just give my opinion about a subject in my timeline and I don't point anyone.

This is my statement.

> With all the problems that GNU software has, I think the names of the projects are the less important ones atm.

I'm not interfering in anyone's job directly or telling people what to do.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom You are quite clearly saying "don't make a fuss about names, there are more important things to worry about".

listening 

@pettter @grainloom
What I said had other implications you are discarding intentionally like the maintainers are idiots and all that. Names are a secondary problem, and many people in the convo agreed with this.

Anyway, that message is not calling out anyone.
You have to come to my fucking profile to read it. Don't have anything else to do?

listening 

@pettter @grainloom I'm not tagging people specifically and telling them their job is not well done. Not from one side not from the other.

And I don't like to do it.

Everybody who shared their opinion with me on this thread (I THINK) was treated respectfully (independently of my stubbornness) and I didn't say their way to understand things is less valuable than mine.

Simply, because it isn't.
My way is just one-another-wrong-way.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom It seems to me that you're now claiming that opinions and praxes can't be more or less wrong. Is that an accurate understanding of what you mean?

listening 

@pettter yes but no.
The problem with them is who decides which is wrong or right?

That's why I asked @grainloom (and refused to answer lol).

listening 

@pettter @grainloom Anyway, I just want to be clear here:
I RESPECTED AND HEARD every comment I received. If I sound like I was confronting it's just because conversations are like that sometimes.

That doesn't mean I don't appreciate the comment or the person who shared it.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga @grainloom This thread has popped up in my feed many many times over the last day and a half.

I don't think I've ever gone to your profile.

listening 

@pettter @grainloom That's a different issue.
But don't say i'm calling people out because I didn't.

And my message is from some days ago.

And I never looked for this discussion, mostly because I think my first message was, in part, misunderstood because people was already thinking about it in a different direction.

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga

Why people think it's wrong you require an explanation before you act: tenforward.social/@emsenn/1024

Why people scoff when you dismiss it as a difference of opinion: tenforward.social/@emsenn/1024

Collected thoughts that address some of your questions and points: emsenn.net/essays/curated-thou
@pettter @grainloom

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga You're telling people they're making problems out of nothing and then telling them what their problems ACTUALLY are. You're saying you're just stating your opinions, and when people say those opinions play into harmful stuff, you're ignoring that as impossible because how could they, they're just opinions.

@pettter @grainloom

listening 

@ekaitz_zarraga
Your opinions are juvenile and your response to people trying to say that hasn't been any better. If you were as clever as you think, you'd listen even though people are being mean. @pettter @grainloom

listening 

@emsenn If I were as clever as you think I think I am I wouldn't be here losing my time with this comment.

I'm not telling people anything.
Anybody is free to ignore opinions or avoid them. I'm not forcing anyone to listen.

This is too much.

Show more

FOSS discourse 

@ekaitz_zarraga @emsenn @pixel @rey @hirojin
That's a bit too individualistic. Maybe a bit more than a bit.
The idea is that free software should benefit people. If all they do is scratch their own itch, they aren't better than paid proprietary software. They are possibly worse, even, since a company at least has to listen to its customers.

FOSS discourse 

@grainloom The other day I had to remind someone what free software is. I said free software is also free for developers.
Many people cheered my explanation.

Do I need to do it again? :)

Free software is not for benefiting people. It's just software. Developers have no obligation with the user.

It's better than proprietary in a practical sense -> can be extended and since it's made it becomes part of humanity's knowledge. Nothing else.

FOSS discourse 

@grainloom Also, since it's free it's automagically benefiting people because it can be forked, studied or whatever. It's software you don't need to write by yourself. That's all that free software means.

Ethical software or people oriented software is something else we shouldn't mix. That was the *real* reason for my first message.

Free software community has many things to fix.

re: FOSS discourse 

@grainloom @ekaitz_zarraga @emsenn @pixel @rey @hirojin

what鈥檚 the point of freedom if you have to do as your told by 鈥渢he people鈥?

re: FOSS discourse 

@xj9 @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga
"stop telling me to clean my room, mom!"

re: FOSS discourse 

@grainloom @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga

my mom can't tell me what to do, i'm an adult. i have the right to have a messy room and the responsibility to deal with the consequences, whatever they may be.

re: FOSS discourse 

@xj9 @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga
What you have a right to do and what is actually good for you and others are not the same thing.

re: FOSS discourse 

@grainloom @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga

it really depends on your values: is the group more important than the individual?

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@xj9 @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga
Is ten individuals more important than one? Is one FOSS dev more important than a thousand people who can't get into programming but need software for their work?

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom
That's not comparable so you can never know.
But anyway you are talking like the FOSS dev is the only one able to touch the project and that is wrong.

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom I can be hired to fork stuff.

Damn, if someone asks I'll do it for free!

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom It is unacceptable to ask others to do stuff because *reasons*.

This is the same discussion I had with people saying blocking in mobile clients GAB was bad.
If you don't like the decision you are free to take your own one, but we can't force people to take the decisions we want.

People at GIMP chose a bad name on purpose and they are idiots. Is it fair? I don't care. It's their choice.

Fuck them, let's make them obsolete (That's why I love Glimpse).

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom Be careful there: This argument is not valid for everything.

It's valid here because the fork can be done. It's not valid where forks are impossible or the effort to make the project work by yourself is not practical.

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom BTW: I think many of the people who took part in the discussion agree with me on the idea of making them obsolete and all that.

The discussion about the name itself is a different one we already talked a lot about. But this is (I think) a good point: If they are doing it wrong and they don't want to change -> just replace them with something better.

philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom (it's another kind of moral obligation, but we tend to see moral obligations on others earlier than on ourselves)

re: philosophical whatever, FOSS 

@grainloom @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @rey @ekaitz_zarraga

my answer is that a tension between the individual and the group is needed. suppressing the individual and abandoning cooperation both have bad outcomes.

@xj9 @hirojin @emsenn @pixel @grainloom @rey @ekaitz_zarraga My take is that maintainers *should* listen to their community, but the point of FLOSS is to provide alternative options when they do not. To hold the maintainer more accountable.

But also there's the situations where you can't please everyone, in which case you'll have turn people away from community.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
3dots.lv Mastodon Instance

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!