On Building Intentional Culture, With Words - A Small Refinement

Earlier, I wrote about how words shape our thoughts, and our culture. (You can read the original post here: http://randall.executiv.es/words-build-culture)

In that post, I introduced a graphic that I have since needed to revise. After further thought, I realized that there are not only words that originated in the "Dark Ages of Computing" but also ones that are rooted in the "Good Old Days" of Ubuntu. Those days of yore when the project was smaller, simpler, and less diverse.

Here it is:

Words from the "Good Old Days of Ubuntu" are also worthy of a firewall. Those words (or phrases) have either lost their original meaning, have become irrelevant, or have been subverted over time. In some cases they were just bad choices in the first place. So, let's leave them in the past too.

Here are some examples:

  • loco
  • ubuntah
  • linux for humans
  • distro
  • newbies

Do you have suggestions for others? I'm happy to add to the list.


The term "user" is for those common software companies. Ubuntu is not one of those. This term just popped in my head: "ubeliever". People who installs Ubuntu simply believes in it and believes in humanity. This term can also flip backward as "believe in u"---believe in yourself that can be part of creating something good for all human beings. A fresh new simple term can attract people from all over the world. :)


What is an ubuntah?


Neither of those posts contain or discuss the word "ubuntah".

So what is an ubuntah?


I couldn't find mention of it in the links above, but I'm guessing it's an interesting way of saying Ubuntu. Never heard it that way personally, might be a Canadian thing :P


Please see the comment from Joe, above yours.


Personally, I'm here for the Linux distro (for human beings).


That's fine, except that Ubuntu is not a "linux distro".


Sure it is. The language problem is that it is not JUST a Linux distribution. The term Ubuntu is overloaded at least three times. Personally, I find the redefinition of Ubuntu to include Canonical upstream development divisive and demotivating.

Just because you take a revisionist approach to the history of the project, doesn't change the facts.


You are correct. It's not just a kernel with some add-ons. It's a whole bunch of P's. We fixate on the software at our peril and at the risk of alienating people.

more here: http://randall.executiv.es/ubuntu-7-p

Contrary to what it may seem, I do not seek to revise history. I seek to leave its baggage in the past. There is no benefit in dragging computer science arcana and minutia into 2014. The 90's are over and people who don't get (or enjoy) Ubuntu yet don't care which kernel is inside.

more here: http://randall.executiv.es/node/15


It depends on what your purpose is.

There are certainly people who would be alienated by defining Ubuntu in technical terms. There are equally people put off by trying to get rid of them. Message is not one size fits all.

My take away from this post can be summarized as "Go away. You and your kind are no longer welcome here."


Post new comment

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Tip Jar


Namecoin (NMC) is also appreciated:

Thanks! Your support helps keep this site free and interesting.

An Ubuntu show right from Vancouver!

Real Local Community