Open Stack

On 2/12/2020 11:56 AM, Nate Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:57:41PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:
>> On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 17:39 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Personally I could see how 'Wodewick' could be perceived as a joke on
>>> speech-impaired people
>> I agree that at first sight this looks very bad. Which should be taken
>> into consideration. However, an extra fact/trivia for Wodewick (for
>> those who didn't know, like I was, as it's not mentioned on the wiki):
>> Terry Jones (director of the movie) had himself rhotacism.
>>
>> So IMO, the presence of the (bad?) joke in the movie itself is a proof
>> of Jones' openness.
> One thing that the Internet - social media particularly but not exclusively -
> does exceptionally well is to present ideas, concepts, or occurrences with all
> of the surrounding context stripped away.  I think that the only way to be
> successful is to select names that stand solid without any context and judged
> from multiple cultural perspectives.
>
> I personally object to Wuhan for this reason.  Even if we were to say that we
> choose the name to honor the victims of this tragedy, that context would be
> stripped away in the transmission and there would be plenty of people who would
> come to the conclusion that we were making light of what is happening, or worse
> that companies that build products based on OpenStack would be making profits
> from that name.  These are terrible thoughts, for sure, but regrettably we have
> to look at how people could percieve it, not how we mean it to be.
>
> Nate
>
Nate,

I am in agreement that the name needs to hold up without context and 
under scrutiny from multiple perspectives.  So, Wuhan is not a good 
choice.  It also is dangerous to use a name associated with a still 
evolving situation.

All,

I think we need to choose a name that doesn't require explanation.  I 
think that Wodewick fails that test.

Jay