"Make Linting Great Again" is anti-inclusive

[thesmiley1]

Description

The readme of this project makes several references to "Make Linting Great Again", which is itself a direct reference to a bitterly divisive political campaign. More people might want to be involved with this project if that were not the case.

Steps to reproduce

1. View README

Debug Logs

N/A

Environment

United States

[iiroj]

Hello,

The reference you mention happens to be the title of the linked article/presentation, so I don't think the problem is with this project's README exactly. The material would continue to exist regardless of the links' text label.

Do you have a good suggestion?

[thesmiley1]

I did notice that the references are part of the title of a linked article and a linked presentation, but I also did intend for the scope of this issue to be the project's readme.

For what it's worth, here is my "use case" for finding the inclusion of the phrase in the readme to be anti-inclusive for prospective developers:

I read software documentation all the time: I read it when I find the software's concept interesting; I read it when use the software for the first time; I read it when it's been a while since I've used the software; I read it when there are new changes to the software. I could go on...

Normally reading software documentation is a fairly pleasant experience, but having to see references to a political campaign that has stoked such bitter division makes that a jarringly negative experience instead.

The thought of coming back to this readme and seeing that time and time again is off-putting enough for me to want to avoid the software. But I think that's unfortunate; the project is interesting with technical merit and I'd like to get to know it a little better. Maybe that sounds silly and maybe I'm no big loss, but even more unfortunate is that better and more important developers than myself might have similar feelings.

As I said, I do mean to keep the scope of this issue to official documentation (readme). The titles of the article and presentation are what they are, and I understand there is good reason to not want to change the titles of things like that, even if it could be done. But since they're not official documentation, that is outside the scope of this issue anyway. The inclusion of their title in the readme, however, is within the scope of the issue.

---

Obviously the big hammer is removing the links, but I think renaming the links would be a perfectly acceptable compromise. Maybe something a little more bibliographic that doesn't include the title? Could be something like...

• "Medium: Andrey Okonetchnikov, 2016"
• "AgentConf: Andrey Okonetchnikoy, 2018"

---

tl;dr I did mean to keep this issue's scope to the link text in the readme. The issue is not with content that is "out there", but with content that is directly part of official documentation.

[okonet]

I'm okay with this. Please create a PR and I'll merge it.

[github-actions]

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 10.5.2 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀