[uwuhn]

The point is that information is deliberately abstracted behind an additional layer for the sake of making it more difficult for the average person to obtain, and the ultimate intent behind that added friction.

You aren't responding to my question regarding intent at all.

>This is to help curb irrational fears against a certain area.

...by adding an extra degree of separation between the name and knowledge of the origin. Right? Do you disagree?

[lovehashbrowns]

Censor and censorship bring with them different connotations, connotations that you purposely want to include; do you agree on that?

It's not adding a degree of separation between name and knowledge, no. It's removing unnecessary and also potentially-damaging information from the name of a pathogen. Why are you not advocating for a name like SARS-CoV-2, which contains more information and is more accurate?

[uwuhn]

>It's not adding a degree of separation between name and knowledge, no. It's removing unnecessary and also potentially-damaging information from the name of a pathogen

How is this not just adding a degree of separation between the name and knowledge of the "unnecessary and also potentially-damaging" information?

That's...exactly what it is. You have to perform one more step to reach the information. It's not "removed" because you can still access it. That's what an additional degree of separation means.

>Why are you not advocating for a name like SARS-CoV-2, which contains more information and is more accurate?

I don't care about the name at all, and you are making huge assumptions here. I would even argue that having SARS in the name is problematic due to its prior association with a specific region in the general public's mind. I'm surprised you didn't consider that before me.