What a curious turn of events. Is "retard" particularly offensive in some cultures? I wasn't aware it had such inflammatory power behind it.

Yes it is highly offensive to many English speaking individuals in the US. It has historically been used as a highly derogatory term for disabled individuals.

It's certainly at minimum an insulting word, and in this context unambiguously so.

In the context of, say, aerodynamics, its merely a word of art, e.g. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aerodynamic+braking

It'll be another word, perhaps in a more ambigious context, next time. Which brings up another point: I just don't want to have to worry about what will become this politically incorrect in the future when I'm writing code and documentation.

Do you not know that words can have more than one meaning? From the context you can tell the meaning. When airbus use "retard" they're using it to mean "to slow down".

It's not "these 6 letters in this combination is banned", it's "stop insulting people based on mental illnesses".

It's not insulting people based on mental illnesses though. The software wasn't for people with mental illnesses.

It's a perfectly good word that should not be banned:

This patch retards the rate of retry attempts after three consecutive failures

It wouldn't be banned in that context.

That requires people to understand context and nuance.

We live in a world where a guy wants to ban Mel Brooks' The Producers because he doesn't realize it's a satire of Hitler, not an homage. Lots of people don't or won't appreciate context.

The context of the original repo was very clearly that of an insulting word.

re: The Producers, with any topic you'll get one or two extremists of any varity. You should judge it not by "did someone want to stop this", but instead by "did someone(s) in power to stop it, want to stop it". One crank protesting outside a cinema is very different from the CEO of a movie studio deciding not to make the film.

And generally people who don't understand context are laughed off the stage and not taken seriously.

Apparently not on github, however.

The whole argument hangs on that point. I don't know where your optimism comes from. Seeing a lot of human behaviour on the net in this area, I have pretty much zero confidence that the right decision would always be made.

"Mental retardation" has been a medical term since relatively recently. The "retardation" means nothing more than "being held back". But people did pick it up as a derogatory term, and so it was replaced with "intellectual disability". A classic euphemism treadmill.

In the context of medication, "retard" is still in use: it describes medication that is released steadily and continuously into the bloodstream.

Useful to know, thanks. I was quite surprised by the furore as in the UK it's typically not deemed quite so offensive.

It is fairly offensive in the UK too. But we usually use fucktard instead I guess which confuses the issue.

Not just USA, in a lot of the rest of the Anglosphere it's insulting.

This reaction to the word will over time also come to the replacement word that people will need to come up with to refer to the condition.

"idiot" and "imbecile" used to be the terms used by medical professionals to refer to mentally retarded people in the 50s and 60s. Then those terms became insults, so they started using the term "mentally retarded". Now that retard has become an insult, another word will have to be found, (handicapped? slow?) and then it will become an insult, and they'll have to find another word...

Also known as the "euphemism treadmill."

The next phase has already begun - "You were one of the special children, weren't you" is a pretty common start to an ass-chewing in the military. They'll have to move on pretty soon.

I'm not comfortable with people casually contributing to nodejs. Can I have that banned?

"The great point, in relation to this topic of their latest investment, is that companies that depend almost entirely on their "communities" can screw those up and destroy their value."

I think it's pretty much inevitable once the money rolls in that companies like Github and others will start censoring content and generally doing things that upset the community to appease their investors. I can't think of a single company that doesn't do this, and in many cases it has led to a downturn of the company if not outright demise.

I don't think as many people are upset by these being taken down as you think.

Not this particular Github repo maybe, but once they start taking down stuff, they will eventually hit something that will make people quite upset. Though from what other social networks generally experience, that won't be enough to drive a lot of users away, usually just the core ones which is enough to start the momentum away from the platform.

Github has chosen the left/PC side, certainly, as evidenced by the rug death. But I suspect this will help them rather than hurt, as the majority of developers are probably left/PC, as is leadership of major tech companies. They are aligning with the power structure.

Do you think Bitbucket would stand up to a PC Twitter campaign? I think not; only the explicitly ideological want to fight such battles.