Make text on the website friendlier and less off-putting

[chshersh]

Duplicating an issue from the previous version of website about difficult and unfriendly language by presenting highlighted by @sjakobi changes in a more structured format and incorporating changes by @simonpj and @goldfirere.

• "Our Ethos" section is difficult to understand haskell.foundation#50

Additionally adding a few more suggestions on my own.

Note: The previous website repo was archived but issues weren't transferred to the new one. I care about this particular issue but I don't have the capacity or motivation to transfer the remaining issues.

The main motivation is the the website is difficult to read for non-native English speakers and it sounds unnecessary convoluted or even hostile in many places. This implicitly sends the message "You're not welcome in Haskell if you're not smart enough".

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/
Old: Our Ethos
New: Our Values
Motivation: The word "ethos" itself is rather unclear. It's not a common choice of words for naming this section so the language sounds alien.

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/
Old: Haskell’s design puts principle ahead of expediency by cleaving closely to the principles of purely functional programming.
New: Haskell's design puts principle ahead of what is easy or popular by being firmly guided by the principles of purely functional programming.
Motivation: The word "expediency" is rather uncommon as well the expression "to cleave closely to sth.".

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/
Old: HF augments, celebrates, and coordinates the contributions and leadership of Haskell’s vibrant community.
New: HF sees itself as a means to celebrate, coordinate, and make more powerful and effective, the contributions and leadership of Haskell’s vibrant community.
Motivation: The word "augment" as a verb is a rather obscure word.

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/
Old: Haskell embodies a radical and elegant attack on the entire enterprise of writing software.
New: Haskell embodies an innovative and elegant approach on the entire enterprise of writing software.
Motivation: The word "attack" is too hostile and off-putting. I don't want to be associated with the language that "attacks" others. We change the wording here to a friendlier version.

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/whitepaper/
Old: https://haskell.foundation/whitepaper/
New: https://haskell.foundation/mission-statement/
Motivation: The word "whitepaper" sounds too academic. It gives an impression of some academic research. It may look really weird that formulating a mission and reasons behind an organisation requires scientific research.

Side note: I wasn't able to find a link that directs to whitepaper from any of the pages on the main website. Maybe I just missed it but in any case is a bit odd to have a resource on the website not linked from anywhere. It gives the impression that it's not supposed to be found.

---

Where: https://haskell.foundation/guidelines-for-respectful-communication/
Old: The GNU Kind Communication Guidelines, published in October 2018, also express the positive tone we seek; Stallman’s post explains the intent.
New:
Motivation: Richard Stallman is a controversial figure. Despite their outstanding technical contributions, their views are not aligned with Diversity and Inclusion in tech. Keeping reference to Stallman's statements in the official guidelines to respectful communication simply stops almost everyone who associates themselves as minority in tech from joining the Haskell community or at least affiliating with HF. So I propose to remove the reference to their statements from Guidelines for Respectful Communication

[tomjaguarpaw]

Strong +1 for using language that is more accessible, particularly to non-native English speakers.

As a point of information, perhaps white paper is a "Britishism". Its use in British English has nothing to do with academia, but perhaps it's not familiar terminology to speakers of international English.

[goldfirere]

I'm in support of these changes.

For what it's worth, I don't identify "white paper" as a Britishism (I believe we Americans use the term, too, but I frankly have spent enough time living in and collaborating with people in the UK that I sometimes get confused on this point), but I'm certainly happy to drop this terminology.

Thanks, @chshersh, for re-raising this issue.