But their response is what gets me. Boo hoo, free speech is dead because you don't want ostencibly-pedophilic jokes associated with your software.
I say if you're committed to an off-color joke or gag, this is a terrible attempt to save face. Just apologize with authenticity and go more subtle. Don't turn it into another *gate or whatever the hell.
Of course, I'm only indifferent because nobody got hurt. A similar but genuinely terrible situation would be the Python Pantyshot debacle...
Exactly, and this is so obviously a troll.
Look at the original feature request to even add the mirror:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51870
You can see Pritz's hesitation at using "cuntflaps.me" as a mirror and his request to use a different name.
To which Alucard suggests "loli.forsale", instead.
So excuse the Arch maintainers for not allowing you to politicize their distribution, thereby polarizing their user base...
Here is the original complaint, https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=227998
And here is the admin's original request to use a mirror with the name mirror.cuntflaps.me where the loli.forsale mirror was ultimately accepted, https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51870
"Unless its some illegal faggot shit, I will always store your loli pics, anon."[1]
I don't appreciate people putting their personalities (whether I generally appreciate their personality or not) into software. The project you are creating is, or should be, an intellectual endeavor and it serves no technical purpose to push your personality onto users. What's more, it lessens your credibility - if you don't understand not to put your personality into your project then I question what bigger mistakes you are making as well. It's the same reason I wouldn't trust savings to a banker wearing a clown costume, it's not about me hating clowns, they can be a clown in private all they want, just don't make a clown out of your own software.
You could argue that software displaying "Good Morning, <name>!" every first run of the day serves no technical purpose, and judging by the tone of your comment, it makes that software inferior and the developer who decided to include this feature - to be of ill mind and immature.
I like to say that seriousness, like fear, will make us do and say stupid things if we let it take over us.
Plenty will find that attitude offensive. Like, who do you think you are telling people what their project should be.
(This is why I'm not in charge of things, mind.)
So it is okay to remove stuff just because somebody was offended? Why nobody is banning Rammstein concerts then? I'm pretty sure many people will find band's name offencive.
I think the complaint is quite petty, and it doesn't really solve any problems. Approximately nobody is going to have a worse opinion of Arch Linux because of the content of a url in /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist, and it's basically a waste of time to address this as an issue.
It's just as much of a waste of time to defend it. Arch has hundreds of mirrors and dozens come and go every month. Dropping one takes less time than it took me to reply to you here.
Am I right in saying that this guy works for the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (presumably in Portugal)? Because for some reason it seems particularly weird to me that someone in that organisation would find that domain name amusing. Maybe it is some kind of professional gallows humour?
Sometimes known as "vested contributor". This is a problem people need to be aware of. It's probably a bad idea to tolerate poor behaviour.
Somebody didn't like the joke about selling one.
I don't quite get the original choice of naming outside of perhaps the lack of awareness of cultural subtleties and connotations that underlie cultural appropriation, but it is apt, since choosing to dress in such a way is a voluntary choice to want to be seen and viewed as a (perfect) and very youthful doll more as something to be admired from a distance than to be interacted with—perhaps the notion of sexual immaturity was seen to reinforce Victorian prudishness and vice versa. The way things get verbally abbreviated in Japanese is that they tend to be abbreviated into abbreviations of 2-mora or 4-mora, roughly corresponding to 2 syllables or 4 syllables. Hence Lolita was quickly abbreviated to loli in casual speak.
From there, the usage of the word loli further evolved in Japanese anime-related media. "loli" probably started off as a not-very-common archetype of female character who looked like the idealized lolita dresser—a doll-like prepubescent person with "refined" manners. Perhaps with influence from the original meaning of Lolita, at some point loli was generalized into the (by now common) prepubescent female character archetype in anime-related media, regardless of whether or not the Victorian-motifed dresses accompanied it.
I argued in another thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14846562), but hope you won't mind my repeating here, the (tried but true) trope that free speech guarantees only the right to say what you want, not to have anyone listen. Not disseminating someone else's speech is not the same thing as suppressing it.
