Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic word
Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org> Tue, 08 September 2020 18:24 UTC
Return-Path: <jay@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB043A0C30 for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 11:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 958XsPSQkNKJ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jays-mbp.localdomain (unknown [158.140.230.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4AD123A0C29; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <A30E2210-DB2C-45FA-8D22-7E6B407A87EF@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F63C89EA-597C-4A05-B26D-10D641C2AB61"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 06:24:46 +1200
In-Reply-To: <7d54db54-5060-b43b-865b-411a901ba36e@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: "gendispatch@ietf.org" <gendispatch@ietf.org>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <759A0AD6-B143-4D71-9CEC-2C94C5A87E3A@akamai.com> <7d54db54-5060-b43b-865b-411a901ba36e@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/skIWS_5qSS7QvbN0A8WAIlsVwCY>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic word
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2020 18:24:50 -0000
I haven't lived in the UK for over 10 years but when I was there this was not archaic but was sort of regional (London and surrounding area + criminal culture such as prisons, gritty TV shows) and common parlance in that context. I was surprised when I discovered the security usage in my 20s but I’ve never considered there to be much chance of confusion between the two communities that use the word differently. Jay > On 9/09/2020, at 12:40 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: > > > > On 08/09/2020 12:38, Salz, Rich wrote: >> This was news to me. FYI > > I believe it's archaic slang, that wasn't ever very common > and perhaps only commonly used before the 1960's but that's > just my impression from general reading and listening and > could well vary from place to place, and time to time, the > word being slang. > > I'm currently unconvinced by that one tbh. And not that > convinced that curated lists of dodgy words is a good way > to handle this. (*) > > S. > > (*) That may be due to also originating from a place where > censorship was still somewhat common in my youth - in our > case the censors were mainly interested in religion and > maintaining their ideas of the good bits of the social > status quo. One of their last gasps was banning "the life > of Brian" movie;-) > >> >> From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> … A >> separate issue that we may want to consider relates to use of the >> word/term “nonce”. In British English this term is slang for a >> paedophile, >> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/nonce<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__dictionary.cambridge.org_dictionary_english_nonce&d=DwMGaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=4LM0GbR0h9Fvx86FtsKI-w&m=h3vPGHnErcFST8UylIdbLohcl4jQGcLXlgr6I_5jpwk&s=4NlmGbVCeTGF1CWzghVwoa1yDT9sIiWHbnji9xdIlzE&e=> >> >> I’m not saying that we should necessarily change this, but we might >> want to consider whether there is an alternative equivalent term that >> could be used instead. … >> >> > <0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc>-- > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director jay@ietf.org
- [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic word Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… John Levine
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Bob Hinden
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Jay Daley
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Dan Harkins
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Kyle Rose
- Re: [Gendispatch] another possibly problematic wo… Colin Perkins