Reposted with permission.

The following is a conversation had between some folks, which I have reposted with the permission of the relevant folks so I can show the funny to Certain People who would appreciate it; one of the people has requested anonymity and the text has been altered solely to remove their username.

CW: I am going to start telling $company_founder that he is "too geonormative"

fnord: *snerk*
fnord: yes
fnord: we should strive for greater geodiverse inclusivity

raxvulpine: Our data presentation needs to be more inclusive of transspatial information.
raxvulpine: "Location is just performative anyway"

fnord: exactly. Heather can have two latitudes!
fnord: plus I really think we ignore the liminality of geonames
fnord: who's to say you can just "disambiguate" them? how arrogant is that!

raxvulpine: What about places that define themselves as clusters of points? They are othered from our discourse by the repressive X,Y system.
raxvulpine: Disambiguating geonames takes away their essential right to locational ambiguity.

fnord: exactly. it's time they felt free to venture out of the geospatial closet.
fnord: we can no longer say that the cartographic majority has the right to determine what a "location" is, or even if there is such a thing at all.

raxvulpine: Indeed, it is well past time to separate the concepts of "location" and "place."

fnord: no longer will we tolerate this war against the geodissident

raxvulpine: Smash the gazetteerarchy!