Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
All posts Aral's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
Max Guthier

@aral
I am vociferously opposed to the idea that developers and designers - especially the ones working on Open Source projects - apply the name user as a vehicle for patronization. People who interact with technology are users, them acting in that specific role in that specific context doesn't make them any less peopl-y. The same applies to employees, consumers, etc.

Ranting against these context specific terminologies just looks like wilful antagonism.

5 Nov 2022 at 10:44 | Wall-to-wall | Open on digitalcourage.social
4 comments
Flisk 🐾

@MaxGuthier 100% agree. the issue of artificial boundaries between so-called "users" and "developers" is not primarily one of how language is used, but of software freedom.

5 Nov 2022 at 15:16 | Open on lain.gay
alex
@MaxGuthier @aral They're accurate descriptors, if we feel that we dislike something about these labels then we should consider how willing we are to participate in a manner that befits them. (e.g. anyone bemoaning "consumer" should think about whether they are in fact behaving like a consumer)
5 Nov 2022 at 18:03 | Open on ak.kawen.space
Strypey

@MaxGuthier
I was going to reply with something similar, and it was fascinating to see the geek historian elsewhere in the thread point out that 'users' came into digital networks from libraries, not generally known as misanthropic projects. I think it's perfectly fine to talk about 'users' in dev discussions where a user isn't necessarily a human at all (could be another piece of software).

Having said that, @aral has a point. In many contexts 'people' (or 'fedizens') is a better choice.

@MaxGuthier
I was going to reply with something similar, and it was fascinating to see the geek historian elsewhere in the thread point out that 'users' came into digital networks from libraries, not generally known as misanthropic projects. I think it's perfectly fine to talk about 'users' in dev discussions where a user isn't necessarily a human at all (could be another piece of software).

6 Nov 2022 at 5:09 | Open on mastodon.nzoss.nz
Max Guthier

@strypey @aral

Oh, yes, certainly there is a point. If we talk about the human interactions in the fediverse, certainly we are taking about people. Only if we speak about the adoption and utilization of technology is the term 'user' relevant.

One of the many boons of the #fediverse is that the technological client and the digital society are independent from each other.

6 Nov 2022 at 8:10 | Open on digitalcourage.social
Go Up