guest271314 / banned

Banned from a site or organization? Account suspended? Censored? Why?
0 stars 0 forks source link

GitHub censors the term "Negro" #2

Open guest271314 opened 3 years ago

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

GitHub censors printing the word "Negro" at "Support Community" for an unknown reason.

That decision effectively attempts to erase centuries of primary source documentation, history, literature that is being used to reproduce the documents with modern technology

and even individuals' birth certificate - without any rational reasoning.

Although I repudiate the entirety of "race" theory, including the official definition of "race", "Black or African American" and "White", and the remainder of the fictitious political classifications found in O.M.B. Directive 15 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Revisions-to-the-Standards-for-the-Classification-of-Federal-Data-on-Race-and-Ethnicity-October30-1997.pdf, that United States federal regulation is nonetheless still controlling as to the official definitions of the terms in the United States, in pertinent part

1. Categories and Definitions ... **-- Black or African American.** A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Terms such as "Haitian" or "Negro" can be used in addition to "Black or African American."
**(13) OMB accepts the following recommendations concerning the term or terms to be used for the name of the Black category:** The name of the Black category should be changed to "Black or African American." The category definition should remain unchanged. Additional terms, such as Haitian or Negro, can be used if desired.

The censorship means that centuries of primary source documents, literature, history are banned at GitHub where the term "Negro" is used - but the term "White" is not censored.

I am still awaiting an explaination from GitHub which provide the reasoning, rationale, and methodology employed by the corporation to make this decision.

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

@github @lee-dohm This issue is unequivocally about your organizations' arbitrary and capricious decision to censor the term "Negro", where was banned from @w3c for the same erroneous reason https://github.community/t/banned-for-no-reason-github-does-nothing-is-complicit/137569/

Dominique Hazael-Massieux Fri, Oct 9, 8:27 AM (8 days ago)

Guest27134,

Following your renewed usage of an inappropriate and completely unrelated to the discussion racial slur in https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-screen-share/issues/141#issuecomment-706205124, I’m informing you that you have been banned from participating in W3C Github repositories...

The content is the primary source research that perform which includes does include the term Negro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbugkADZM0M and the task of providing audio to the complete Dred Scott case, where Chief Justice Taney got the law correct as to original intent however got the history wrong as to the part of their Opinion where they use "brought to the ..." where those "Free Negroes" or "Free Blacks"; there are multiple instances in which the term "White" or "white" is attempted to be inserted into the official record ex post fact where the term was not used in the original document; thus it is of substantial importance in primary source research to print the words or terms of art used in the original document.

It is absolutely unclear what the alleged "racial slur" is. What word or phrase, exactly?

What exact methodology - your specification - did you employ to reach that decision and deploy such a policy?

Your organization needs to explain your exact methodology for determining that Negro is "inappropriate" or "offensive" - and how your organization decided to exclude the term "white" or "White race" from the same criteria and censorship.

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

GitHub is not doing anybody any favors by censoring the term "Negro", and to be clear, am not asking for the term "White" or "white race" to be censored. That is very problematic.

I will post here my repudiation of "race" theory, specifically in the first two parts of the three part series, the fictions "Black" "race" (including "Negro", "African American"), and "White" "race", including "Caucasian" to unequivocally prove by way of evidence, that I did not print what is characterized wantonly as a "racial slur", nor is the term "Negro" "inappropriate" or "offensive" where defined by the United States in administrative regulations, that is, when individuals make "Black" on a U.S. Census Bureau form, "the term Negro may be used". Of course, that does not mean that the terms are not wholly fictitious inventions that cannot be found in the physical world, as there is no such thing as either "black racial groups of Africa" (how many, exactly?) nor "North Africa" or "Middle East" (where, exactly?)

Now, no individual nor institution in the known universe has been able to refute the facts presented in those articles. Therefore it is impossible for me to print a "racial slur", I am a scientist, I perform primary source research. I did not invent those terms, the individual that invented "race" theory and practice "racism", which is merely any individual that self-identifies with any fictitious "race" - usually failing to actually look up the official definition of the terms they use, instead rely on folklore and propaganda. I need to be able to perform primary research and incorporate usage of modern technology to preserve historical documents, literature, treatises - not be censored by individuals and institutions which have not even bothered to look up the official definitions of the terms, and feign being "offended" by usage of the term Negro. Well, lodge your complaint with the United States, as I am contemplating doing - again - in the United States Supreme Court, to finally get rid of the fraud of "race" theory. However, in field trials, even mentioning these terms it becomes apparent that the American Association of Anthropologists were correct, individuals rely on European folklore more than facts, even the would-be intelligentsia, thus it is a quite difficult task to vet "race" theory when Negro is censored though not White and we do not need any term censored - we just need people to snap out of their reliance on mythology and understand that there is no such thing as "black" or "white" "race" - per the definition; that mythology lives in peoples' minds until they actually read the definitions of the fictions and ask: "Where precisely is 'Middle East'?", etc.

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

Screenshot_2020-11-16_14-48-17

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

Gmail - [GitHub Support Community] Email issue -- Posting error.pdf

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

GitHub Support Community githubcommunity@discoursemail.com Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 2:19 PM Reply-To: GitHub Support Community githubcommunity@discoursemail.com To: guest271314@gmail.com We’re sorry, but your email message to [“githubcommunity+8424176c1b23e65527d2ffc040dd6c cd@discoursemail.com”] (titled Re: [GitHub Support Community] [PM] Post hidden by community flags) didn’t work. Reason: Your post contains a word that’s not allowed: Negro If you can correct the problem, please try again.

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

Screenshot_2020-11-16_18-45-22

guest271314 commented 3 years ago

(CNN) - Josh Gibson, one of the greatest sluggers in the history of the Negro Leagues, could become big league baseball's single-season batting average record holder with the .441 mark he set 77 years ago.

That's because Major League Baseball this week sought to correct a longstanding wrong by recognizing the Negro Leagues as its equivalent and counting the statistics and records of thousands of Black players as part of the game's storied past. The announcement came during the centennial celebration of the founding of the Negro Leagues, which showcased larger-than-life figures such as Gibson and Leroy "Satchel" Paige, a pitching legend who made his MLB debut in 1948 at the age of 42.

The long overdue acknowledgment quickly prompted speculation over the decision's impact on the record books.

Will Gibson become the new "home run king," surpassing Barry Bonds' career record of 762? Will he edge Hugh Duffy's .440 average in 1894 with the Boston Beaneaters? Scott Simkus, one of researchers credited by MLB with compiling and constructing the Seamheads Negro Leagues Database, the leagues' most definitive record, said he doesn't expect major records to be shattered. Some Negro League players will appear among leaders in categories such as batting average, slugging and on-base percentage but the key is "recognizing gentlemen who played in the Negro Leagues as equals." "Many people have heard of Martin Dihigo and Josh Gibson and Satchel Paige. But what about the thousands of other men who played in the Negro Leagues from 1920 to 1948? They're being recognized finally as major league caliber ballplayers. Their statistical records, their careers are going to be considered equal to anybody who had played in the National League or American League during that period of time."

Thousands of names to be added

MLB said it has begun a review, along with the Elias Sports Bureau, to "determine the full scope" of the major league "designation's ramifications on statistics and records." The bureau is the official statistician of Major League Baseball.

"MLB and Elias will work with historians and other experts in the field to evaluate the relevant issues and reach conclusions upon the completion of that process," the statement said.

"As for what records are going to be broken, there's no way to tell yet until until we have seen all the data," said John Labombarda, head of the editorial department at the Elias Sports Bureau.

"Yes, I've already seen tweets that Josh Gibson hold now holds the major league record for highest batting average in a season. That's fantastic. But we have not, and Major League Baseball has not, made any announcement like that."

Gibson's Baseball Hall of Fame plaque -- he's one of 35 Negro League stars enshrined in Cooperstown -- says he "hit almost 800 home runs in league and independent baseball." But the majority of those homers came not in league-sanctioned games (about 50 to 75 per season) but in exhibitions played against former big leaguers and white semi-pro teams. "Right now Josh has maybe 235, 240 home runs," said Larry Lester, co-founder of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum in Kansas City. "We're still compiling statistics. We got a few more seasons left, and he is, right now, the all-time leader in Negro Leagues history."

MLB's historic recognition coincided with the Cleveland baseball club's decision this week to remove "Indians" from its name as US corporate brands reexamine their use of racist caricatures and stereotypical names.

"All of us who love baseball have long known that the Negro Leagues produced many of our game's best players, innovations and triumphs against a backdrop of injustice," MLB Commissioner Robert Manfred Jr. said in a statement.

"We are now grateful to count the players of the Negro Leagues where they belong: as Major Leaguers within the official historical record."

MLB said it was "correcting a longtime oversight" by elevating the status of the Negro Leagues -- which consisted of seven leagues and about 3,400 Black and Latino players from 1920 to 1948.

"It's sad this great history has been kept from them," Lester said.

'Historical validation' for Black players

The decline of the Negro Leagues began when Jackie Robinson became MLB's first Black player with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947.

In 1969, the Special Committee on Baseball Records did not include the Negro Leagues among six "Major Leagues" it identified since 1876.

"It is MLB's view that the Committee's 1969 omission of the Negro Leagues from consideration was clearly an error that demands today's designation," MLB said.

"The perceived deficiencies of the Negro Leagues' structure and scheduling were born of MLB's exclusionary practices, and denying them Major League status has been a double penalty, much like that exacted of Hall of Fame candidates prior to Satchel Paige's induction in 1971," John Thorn, the official historian of Major League Baseball, said in a statement.

"Granting MLB status to the Negro Leagues a century after their founding is profoundly gratifying."

Bob Kendrick, president of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum, said the recognition "serves as historical validation for those who had been shunned from the Major Leagues and had the foresight and courage to create their own league that helped change the game and our country, too."

The acknowledgment is "a meritorious nod to the courageous owners and players who helped build this exceptional enterprise and shines a welcomed spotlight on the immense talent that called the Negro Leagues home," he said in a statement.

The museum, on Twitter, called MLB's move "extraordinarily important" but added that Negro League players "never looked to Major League Baseball to validate them."

Indeed, former Negro Leagues player Ron Teasley, 93, who played for the New York Cubans in 1948, said on the phone from his home in Detroit that the recognition merely confirmed what Negro League players had long known.

"We always felt that we were part of a higher caliber game and this just more or less certifies it," he said. "I just didn't think it would take so long to come."

CNN's Dan Kamal contributed to this report.

Source: The Negro Leagues are now part of official MLB stats. But don't expect major changes in the record books By Ray Sanchez, CNN Updated 5:12 PM ET, Thu December 17, 2020