[freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Nations classification again

["SamBC" <sambc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski
>
>
<SNIP>
>
> btw. Boers ARE natives.

Really???? I was under the impression that the Boers (roughly-equivalent to
modern Afrikaans, white south africans, yes?) were mostly Dutch colonists
(hence the lingual links), and are as much natives of Africa as 'Americans'
are of that continent

>
> > That was my point - all of this skin colour business is most
> unsavoury to
> > myself. I would suggest that *if* people insist on doing it,
> that they use
> > more technical terms like Caucasian, African, Asian, Indian, oriental,
> > aboriginal, etc etc.
> [...]
> > I would not categorise nations by skin colour, but if anyone insists on
> > doing it, use technical terms.
>
> With exception of "caucasian", what also mean something completely else,
> I agree to use your favourite "technical" terms.

Caucasian seems to be a lingual difference - different languages and nations
use it differently (one for the localisation?)

>
> This is not ``categorise nations by skin colour''.
> This categorization goes by ethnic groups and is objective.
> If you don't want to use it, don't use it. Simple, isn't it ?

*I* don't object. I am pointing out that, some time in the future, some
parties may find this objectionable. I disagree with it philosophically, but
feel that it is your freedom to do this.

>
> I always wonder why some people try to stop others from doing things that
> don't harm them in any way ...

I'm not trying to stop anyone doing anything (right now) - just contributing
an opinion... what are these lists for anyway? I'll say, IMHO, they are for
the contribution of code & DISCUSSION OF IDEAS. I'm discussing.


SamBC