In the following scenario, the app developer is in the right?
App dev: Here's my new app! It's called F----T, for FAntastic Gnome Game On Terminal.
Me: Hey, that word is offensive to me and others like me, it's a word we hear before being beaten, bullied, killed, or discriminated against. Do you think you could change it?
App dev: No. My intent was not to discriminate. You're being unreasonable.
Me: The fact that you are unwilling to even entertain changing the app name from a well known slur used against people like me makes me feel completely unwelcome.
App dev: Sounds like your problem, sticks and stones.
The word has been considered a serious slur for years. If, by chance, you wind up naming your project with a tier-1 slur, yes, you should absolutely rename it.
The fact that g--p is a slur is not a new thing. It's the equivalent of f----t or r----d for a large number of disabled people, and has been for years. The fact that you did not know this doesn't make it any less true.
Do you honestly believe a name change would vault the project into obscurity? Seems like a quick press release would do it.
I have no idea why I get downvoted every time I say this. If there are a large number of people out there saying 'I was called this name due to my disability, it makes me feel like shit, and the fact that a popular FOSS project continues to use it despite being told this time and time again makes me feel that the FOSS community sees me as less than human' how is it remotely complicated to have the common courtesy to apologize, pick a better name, and carry on? This is not hard, it costs nothing, and it's just basic human respect.
Why is it stupid to discuss whether the language we use could be harming people? If you're not interested in joining that discussion productively, you could simply scroll on.
There are plenty of articles and comments out there from disabled people recounting how that word has been weaponized against them. When people are telling us this, it seems pretty tasteless to continue using it.
I switched my design workflow to FLOSS tools exclusively. Krita is a perfectly competent photoshop replacement, Inkscape has been developed at a breakneck pace in the past year, the workflow is different, but it's every bit as good as illustrator, and Scribus is great once you get used to the workflow. If anything, Scribus' workflow helps you plan and structure your projects better. IMHO FLOSS tools are absolutely ready for professional work, but you cannot expect the workflow to match existing proprietary tools.
What's the confusion? They're just like public ones, but pristinely organized, extremely well seeded, and you're less likely to get a letter from your ISP for torrenting with them.
Easiest way to get started at the moment (imo) is to go through the interview to get into MAM, get VIP status, then use the invite threads in the forum to access other trackers.
Now maintaining your ratio however... I'm having a hard time at Orpheus, with a seedbox.
I was responding to the argument in the previous comment, not making a point about the term "rice."