+1 for renaming @poledance to @rsinger.
On Friday, January 18, 2013, Tim Donohue wrote:
> FWIW, there are a few zoia commands I've noticed that could come across as
> sexist (especially if you see Zoia as being a "female" bot).
> I don't think they are used that frequently, but I have seen:
> @poledance (have zoia display a poledancer)
> @euph (have zoia respond in a euphemism)
> This isn't meant to spoil any of the fun of having zoia around. For the
> most part, I don't take offense to zoia. But, I do find zoia annoying /
> noisy (which is why I'm rarely in code4lib IRC). Though there are some
> useful / helpful zoia commands in there.
> I like Jon Gorman's suggestion of having a friendly, helpful bot and a
> wise-cracking one. That way, those of us annoyed by the ongoing
> wise-cracking can ignore it, while still having access to the helpful
> stuff. (And it may be easier to turn off the wise-cracking parts during the
> conference if desired.)
> - Tim
> On 1/18/2013 10:26 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> Actually, I find the "playing" with Zoia itself offensive. As per my
>> response to my own message.
>> It objectifies women. Treats them as play-things. Makes me very
>> uncomfortable. If we want to have an information bot, perhaps like the
>> one used by W3C which takes minutes for meetings (Zakim, I believe it
>> is), that seems reasonable. But to have a "play-thing" that is gendered
>> is a really, really bad idea. In fact, to have a "play-thing" of any
>> kind on the channel might not be a good idea. I know that some folks
>> find it fun, but it is akin to the locker-room shenanigans (at least as
>> I experience it), and it's a HUGE in-joke that makes it obvious to
>> anyone new that they aren't "in".