> Isn't review itself problematic though? To re view something implies it needs to be viewed, which can't be done by a blind person.
In that case, it would seem that "blind review" would be a contradiction, isn't it?
> This is the problem, once you go down the route of banning words that could possibly be problematic, then where do you stop, because any word can be problematic.
Of course, you are right.
But to me, my intention isn't about being disrespectful or not, but rather, to be clear and accurate.
> But that's just more evidence that we shouldn't take parts of a phrase and start interpreting them out of context.
I agree, but I still think that it is better to use more descriptive and clear words; "anonymous review" seems more descriptive and clear to me than "blind review" does.
(I also don't like the words "metric ton" and "tonne"; I think "megagram" is more descriptive and clear, so it is better.)
In that case, it would seem that "blind review" would be a contradiction, isn't it?
> This is the problem, once you go down the route of banning words that could possibly be problematic, then where do you stop, because any word can be problematic.
Of course, you are right.
But to me, my intention isn't about being disrespectful or not, but rather, to be clear and accurate.