|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 140 responses total. |
micklpkl
|
|
response 102 of 140:
| 
Dec 19 13:47 UTC 2003 |
I never asked anyone for an apology, and certainly don't expect to
receive one in this item.
fwiw, which I grant you is not a hell of lot now that happyboy et al
have found a perceived weakness to tear into, gull's original statement
was more direct and sweeping than the basic "Texans like x" that
mcnally states in resp:97.
But whatever y'all want to believe, I realise I'm not going to change
any minds here. You're all obviously more knowledgeable than I, and
your respective states are paragons of fair laws and intelligent
citizens.
Yes, *this* Texan is sensitive; many more probably aren't, and some
might actually seek out some broadcast from Huntsville during
executions (though I really don't have a clue where this alleged
entertainment is shown, other than bits on the nightly news) --- many,
many more are just people, trying to make a life for themselves, the
same as the rest of the nation.
|
gull
|
|
response 103 of 140:
|
Dec 19 15:14 UTC 2003 |
Re resp:101: I guess that watching from the outside, it never struck me
as a "live and let live" attitude; in fact the enforced political
correctness in California sounds awfully oppressive to me. A good
example is the recent L.A. city government decision to ban the use of
the terms "master" and "slave" for electronic equipment in their
offices. I'm not sure I'd want to live in a state where it was
basically illegal to ever do anything that might offend anyone.
|
keesan
|
|
response 104 of 140:
|
Dec 19 17:01 UTC 2003 |
What are they using instead of master and slave?
|
remmers
|
|
response 105 of 140:
|
Dec 19 17:42 UTC 2003 |
See http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/master.asp for details.
The story doesn't say what the replacement terms (if any) are,
however.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 106 of 140:
|
Dec 19 17:44 UTC 2003 |
I'm surprised they find those terms for machines objectionable. Do they
also find the term "master" objectionable for pets?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 107 of 140:
|
Dec 19 17:51 UTC 2003 |
(The Online Directory team at U-M switched to "master" and "shadow" for its
servers, after a similar complaint in 1998 or 1999.)
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 108 of 140:
|
Dec 19 18:26 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 109 of 140:
|
Dec 19 18:29 UTC 2003 |
Re 106> I doubt they found just the term "master" objectionable. It
was the "master-and-slave" combination.
I personally do not like the term "master" when used in the case of
pets. Maybe because I viewmy pet and pets in general as members of the
family. Nothing to do with the possibility that I might be black.
(And everyone knows that cats do not have "masters" anyways, they have
staff.)
|
gull
|
|
response 110 of 140:
|
Dec 19 18:51 UTC 2003 |
Re resp:106: Apparently an L.A. city employee filed a complaint saying
they found the terms offensive. That's all it takes, one person being
offended.
|
scg
|
|
response 111 of 140:
|
Dec 19 18:53 UTC 2003 |
In Berkeley, a pet's former master is now known as the pet's "owner/guardian."
The original proposal before the Berkeley City Council, modeled on a similar
ordinance in Boulder (which is not in California...) was to have those who
take care of pets be the pet's "guardian," but that was seen as going too far.
That said, I've generally found it much easier to offend people in Ann Arbor,
where there enough conservatives around for conservative ideas to seem
threatening, and where there are enough conservatives around to make a big
deal out of how threatening various liberal ideas are. I remember walking
across the University of Michigan Diag a few years ago, and seeing that every
ten feet or so somebody had chalked "gays are people too." It shocked me,
not for the reason it was presumably supposed to, but because I was struck
by the sudden realization that I was somewhere where that needed to be said.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 112 of 140:
|
Dec 19 19:10 UTC 2003 |
I could get used to "guardian" for pets. I'm not very comfortable
with "owner". But I could be weird. I just realised last night that
I've become pretty attached to Pablo, a co-worker's betta-fish that
I'm looking after for a couple of weeks. (Thisw is especially ironic,
because I've always maintained that fish aren't "real" pets :P )
|
keesan
|
|
response 113 of 140:
|
Dec 19 19:12 UTC 2003 |
People buy and sell pets. That makes them owners. Of course some pets just
find you on their own.
|
drew
|
|
response 114 of 140:
|
Dec 19 19:16 UTC 2003 |
Re #104: SCSI?
|
remmers
|
|
response 115 of 140:
|
Dec 19 19:24 UTC 2003 |
<remmers considers for a moment whether "custodian" would be appropriate,
then decides in the negative>
|
rcurl
|
|
response 116 of 140:
|
Dec 19 19:42 UTC 2003 |
After some thought on the matter.....I conclude that master/slave is *exactly*
the correct term for things like master and slave clocks, as it describes
the relationship: the clock (or whatever) is a "slave" to the "master",
as it follows the master's every command and has no independent behavior
in that relationship. What can a *person* possibly find wrong with this
terminology? Is the relationship changed by the renaming? (no). Is any
person denigrated by the terminology? (no). Is the objective to eliminate
the word slave from our vocabulary? If so, we would not be able to have
any laws banning slavery.
Interestingly, though, radio amateurs refer to their "master" and "slave"
stations as "control station" and "remote station", so the pair is
control/remote. I'm sure this was done without any sociological intentions...
(maybe).
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 117 of 140:
|
Dec 19 20:06 UTC 2003 |
Re 113> That just opens another whole other can of worms, that
of "buying and selling" pets. I've never been for that either.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 118 of 140:
|
Dec 19 20:20 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 119 of 140:
|
Dec 19 20:22 UTC 2003 |
I bet if we called them "bishop" and "parishioner" devices, with the
parishioner device getting authoritative information and instruction
on how to behave from the bishop device, Rane would find it easier to
be offended.. Everyone's got buttons you can push, rational or not.
|
other
|
|
response 120 of 140:
|
Dec 19 21:54 UTC 2003 |
How about "God" and "Pope" devices? Heh...
|
tod
|
|
response 121 of 140:
|
Dec 19 23:49 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
twenex
|
|
response 122 of 140:
|
Dec 20 01:36 UTC 2003 |
Mickey mate, I'm fairly sure nobody except habbyboy gives a
thimblefull of rat's piss what happyboy thinks, at least unless and
until he starts using his brain for the purpose for which it was
intended, rather than as a willy-warmer.
|
bru
|
|
response 123 of 140:
|
Dec 20 03:25 UTC 2003 |
But i am the "MASTER" of my home. Go ahead, ask the cats! they will tell
you.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 124 of 140:
|
Dec 20 05:50 UTC 2003 |
Re bishop/parishoner: too many syllables.
Master/slave devices were in existence when I became sentient, so it was
easy to not be aware of any other implications of the words. Introducing
new pairs could easily raise objections from someone unless totally
free of parallels to other human relationships. Control/remote is one
such.
|
sj2
|
|
response 125 of 140:
|
Dec 20 06:12 UTC 2003 |
How about "executing"? I can't *execute* my programs anymore? ;)
|
slynne
|
|
response 126 of 140:
|
Dec 20 23:30 UTC 2003 |
haha. I think that some people just dont get certain other people's
sense of humor.;) Luckily for me, I do. Which is why happyboy makes me
laugh so much.
|