[Baypiggies] Voting for a new name

Terry Carroll carroll at tjc.com
Thu Apr 13 00:23:37 CEST 2006

Just my two cents here, addressing a number of thoughts I've seen 
expressed in a number of emails.

I support a name change.  My opinion is that the present name is
unprofessional and sounds amateurish.

I understand the issue was discussed previously and the discussion halted
with what was finality at the time; however, my understanding of the basis
for the finality was that a/the founder, who also hosted the mailing list
and web site vetoed any possible change as the discussion began, and since
that individual was effectively the "owner" of the group, that individual
could speak with finality.  That was reasonable, I think.  But the
predicate of website and mailing list ownership are no longer present, and
in my view, neither is the finality.

I disagree that a name change should require 2/3 of all members, which
effectively means that not voting is the same as voting "no."  Not voting
is the same as not voting.  It indicates not caring; it does not indicate 
a preference for no change.

The fact that the domain name includes "baypiggies" is not a significant 
drawback, in my mind.  There is no requirement that the domain name and 
the organization name match; or, in fact, that there be only one domain 

I disagree that a name change, or consideration of it, should be 
postponed because there are other more important issues.  For almost every 
issue you can name, there is always something more important.  Addressing 
one does not mean others must be ignored.

Because the recent survey specifically declared a discussion of a name
change to be OT for that survey, I did not include comments there.  But I
see that others did.

One comment on the survey referred to something like (paraphrasing 
from memory here) "loud people on the mailing list" and suggested that 
those persons' opinions are somehow worth less because of the mode of 
participation they choose.  I don't buy this.  I don't believe that 
meeting attendance is the only basis to determine whether anyone's opinion 
is worth listening to.  I personally have only attended about 3 meetings 
since I joined the group (but I was speaker at one of them); I've simply 
found the mailing list to be a useful resource, and certainly more 

In fact, it does not strike me as unlikely that an unprofessional-sounding 
name and low participation could be linked.  I don't know how I'd go about 
testing that hypothesis, but it's worth, I think, bearing in mind.

Finally, in support of a name change, I suggest we take a cue from the 
Python web site itself, which recently underwent a makeover to provide a 
more professional image.  An upgrade to the group name is consistent with 

Here's one legitimate reason to count my opinion for a little less: I 
don't program professionally.  It was once a part of my job, a career ago, 
but not any more.  Any programming I do now, whether in Python or 
otherwise, is essentially as a hobby.  But if I were a professional 
programmer, I think I would prefer to have a more professional-sounding 
association name on my resume than "Baypiggies." 

More information about the Baypiggies mailing list