The greater question is why these changes are to be made.
It evidently creates problems in another project, and it is non-language.
The effect of which is creating problems where there are none.
The supposed issue is an assumed one, and it is abused to great extent by non-rational actors already. The nature of Genders and German isn’t offensive.
The implied problem can only be created by giving into that idea, because it invariably creates a myriad of different active actions that are inconsistent with each-other, language and objective reality. From a linguistical point of view, the nomenclature of people pushing this agenda is a disaster, and it robs us of tools to accurately describe the world around us. I will never make a single concession to it.
So the onus is on the person suggesting said change to give a rationale.
That didn’t happen.
“Dude, why you no” in similar fashion, is a figure of speech, in what is a saying.
Why would anyone care to change anything like that, is the question, and if arguing that it is of minor detail, my interest in calling it into question, is the aforementioned.
That it is informal isn’t a problem either, because that lends itself to suggest it is trivially easy to use the product. Professionalism for the sake of professionalism is not a motivation, nor an ideal.
Granting power to people that haven’t earnt it, by way of a CoC, is a similar way to forego merit for acceptance of non-meritocracy. That has been a giant failure, and hasn’t delivered on any of the promises it implicitly makes.
In the first post “welcome” is used to mean ruining the quality of an existing language branch, or inventing something that isn’t German, and using this project to do so. That is a false dichotomy, of what is a sleigh of hand.
decentralizing and autonomy/anti-authoritarianism – for what yunohost stands – are essentially very feminist ideas.
No, they are essentially non-feminist. The reason can be observed in that feminism doesn’t represent autonomy for women at present day, robbing them of their representation for what is genetic discrimination. It represents the outmost authoritarian sentiment, in the areas of the world that are the most free.
a critical use of language could make this project very attractive to people in the technofeminist/cyberfeminist movement who would bring along very valuable knowledge.
If to mean “critical theory”, no premise of critical rationality is presented, nor is it by its very essence critical. It is “blunt”, for both of those. The idea that regular German makes a project unattractive, or in the very least devoid of extra fairness over non-German, is huge warning flag. If you can’t have a project be German for German-speaking people, there is no arena of mutual engagement that stands up to critique. That does not command respect.
OTOH, “technofeminist/cyberfeminist” people need their own German-inspired language why?
Everyone is obviously welcomed to contribute, and that by its very nature is a requirement. Driving an agenda is not a contribution.