While I don't agree with mkempe, I don't see why this kind of messages should be downvoted... Choosing a name is a difficult task, and honoring someone with their name in a new creation is a noble gift, but the page does not explain why it was named like that, and so it remains elusive. Google could have take the time to explain it. But it's not like it's a shame, mkempe.
Also, if you could see who downvoted you, you could perhaps start a little war, so I don't think that such a conversation system would be better.
> While I don't agree with mkempe, I don't see why this kind of messages should be downvoted.
Because mkempe is accusing Project Jacquard of appropriating a historical figure's name for their own gain. Somehow, it seems mkempe figures that the act of paying homage cannot be done without a citation or fair use disclaimer.
It's one thing to suggest adding a note about the historical Jacquard, another to take umbrage at an innocent name. I really don't think that sort of response should be encouraged.
Otherwise, I suppose someone should tell Project Euler that they need to explain who Euler is on their homepage.
It's not explicitly stated, but I agree that if you've heard of Euler the homage is obvious.
Likewise, if you've heard of Jacquard or his invention, then the homage here is obvious as well. Neither case requires a footnote explaining the reference.
Also, if you could see who downvoted you, you could perhaps start a little war, so I don't think that such a conversation system would be better.