Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dzWG7-0006hb-Go for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:05:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dzWG6-0002Kp-LG for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:05:50 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dzWG5-0002Je-Kh for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:05:49 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dzWG2-0002hP-MY; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:05:49 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v93N5gWv029012; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 19:05:42 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: "Jonathan S. Katz" cc: "Joshua D. Drake" , "David G. Johnston" , devguy.ca@gmail.com, "pgsql-docs@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: inappropriate word 'victim' In-reply-to: References: <20171003193804.28564.41434@wrigleys.postgresql.org> <0af35b7c-9421-ed87-34cd-9f73f21e3d71@commandprompt.com> <0d692205-5ec3-55aa-51cb-d029eb93cd12@commandprompt.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Jonathan S. Katz" message dated "Tue, 03 Oct 2017 17:53:30 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-ID: <29010.1507071942.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 19:05:42 -0400 Message-ID: <29011.1507071942@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-docs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org "Jonathan S. Katz" writes: > So there is a precedent for using “target” for this command. I wouldn't object to substituting "target" for "victim"; they're both pretty specific, and there's little risk of misunderstanding which database is meant. I don't know if that amounts to much of an advance in political correctness, though. I'm less happy about substituting vaguer words like "subject". Particularly for non-native English speakers, that seems like it could be confusing --- eg, if you know the distinction between subject and object of a sentence, you might think it means the DB where the command is being issued. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs