Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter • Hacker News Board

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#31

Post by sitepodmatt » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 12:58 PM UTC

Flow wrote: post #21

rsyring wrote: post #15

Make no mistake, inclusion and diversity at all costs is the new "religious" standard. Your personal beliefs do not matter. You will conform or you will suffer. (Vote down, that's fine, but it's still true.)

I've started to mentally replace the words "inclusion and diversity" with "conformity" on certain places on the net.

Agreed. These people are essentially bullies acting from their ivory tower of unchallengable beliefs and morals. Their non-sense such as "he holds views that are in opposition with the values of the Drupal project." actually do more to suppress tolerance, diversity, and inclusion than encourage it. tl;dr think like me or I throw the dummy out the pram.

I wish techies would get back to focusing on tech, it seems every other tweet and hacker news post is something meta about diversity, inclusion, tolerance, racism etc..

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#32

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 12:58 PM UTC

Flow wrote: post #21

rsyring wrote: post #15

Make no mistake, inclusion and diversity at all costs is the new "religious" standard. Your personal beliefs do not matter. You will conform or you will suffer. (Vote down, that's fine, but it's still true.)

I've started to mentally replace the words "inclusion and diversity" with "conformity" on certain places on the net.

[deleted]

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#33

Post by ekianjo » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 12:59 PM UTC

sorry but how does that work to be for tolerance and anti discrimination in the first place ? anti discrimination means you Do NOT tolerate people who discriminate, so you cant be tolerant at the same time. I always see this kind of contradictions in principles.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#34

Post by humanrebar » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:01 PM UTC

hpaavola wrote: post #24

rsyring wrote: post #15

Make no mistake, inclusion and diversity at all costs is the new "religious" standard. Your personal beliefs do not matter. You will conform or you will suffer. (Vote down, that's fine, but it's still true.)

In this particular case, who should have conformed and who had to suffer? Would you say that it was because the exact opposite of inclusion and diversity?

It's impossible to be absolutely "inclusive". Situations like this make the cognitive dissonance obvious.

1. There is no standard of what ethical behavior entails. Many thoughts are actually incompatible. In this context:

1a. Some people might think it's unethical or immoral to be violent even in a consensual sexual context. This could include certain religious people, but it could include certain kinds of pacifists and feminists as well.

1b. Some people might think it's unethical or immoral to have anything beyond a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. In this view, if you know about it and they didn't tell you personally, it's messed up.

1c. Some people might think it's unethical or immoral to be anything less than 100% supportive of any kind of sexual expression.

1d. Some people really don't care and are offended that their desire to be left out of all this isn't respected.

...there are certainly more positions and combinations of positions here.

2. There is the secondary question as to what means in the pursuit of (1) are ethical or moral.

2a. What information is public?

2b. Once something is leaked, can we use it? How do we pretend we hadn't learned something?

2c. What opinions are worth respecting? Understanding? Should we silence people with unconscionable opinions?

2d. Can we outright exclude people for having non-inclusive beliefs?

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#35

Post by StavrosK » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:01 PM UTC

Being unfamiliar with this, from the starting few paragraphs I thought "oh man, they have a white surpremacist developer or something and now there's a scandal, huh". Then I learnt that he was ousted because of his sex life. What the fuck? What does it matter to anyone what he does with other consenting adults in private?

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#36

Post by ekianjo » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:01 PM UTC

dorfsmay wrote: post #23

In the same line, Brendan Eich. I completely disagree with his views on marriage of homosexuals, but disagree that it led him to have to quit his position at Mozilla Foundation.

another victim of the proponents of Liberty And Freedom. Who basically dont accept opinions different than theirs.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#37

Post by tnones » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:01 PM UTC

minsight wrote: post #19

rsyring wrote: post #15

Make no mistake, inclusion and diversity at all costs is the new "religious" standard. Your personal beliefs do not matter. You will conform or you will suffer. (Vote down, that's fine, but it's still true.)

I'm not too sure that diversity or inclusion has a net cost.

Diversity and inclusion have a cost of having to deal with ongoing disagreement and friction that comes from coexistence.

Diversity(tm) and Inclusion(tm) have a cost of inviting Diversity Experts to tell you why you cannot do any of this on your own and why you need to pay them for it, even though none of their materials or solutions have been peer-reviewed and the readily observable effect is that they make everyone miserable.

One is how communities work, the other is how protection rackets work.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#38

Post by irishcoffee » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:03 PM UTC

fmitchell0 wrote: post #27

There is an important point that is being missed in this conversation. There are facts that are undisputed by both sides of the argument: - Should a person have a right to privacy? Yes - Should a person be discriminated based on their beliefs? No - Should a person in leadership be forced to expose their private life? No There are two questions, however, that is causing everyone to trip over themselves and table-flip:…

> For example, if a person has religious views that women should not work, should they be part of the open source community? Of course. Should they be a leader of the community and have prominent speaking roles?

Doesn't this just kick the can down the street a few feet? It seems, and I may have interpreted it incorrectly, that the leader or leaders of a community must not personally hold any controversial views at all according to this. Speaking bluntly, I think that is impossible.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#39

Post by pavlov » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:03 PM UTC

dorfsmay wrote: post #23

In the same line, Brendan Eich. I completely disagree with his views on marriage of homosexuals, but disagree that it led him to have to quit his position at Mozilla Foundation.

Eich was CEO, though. It's a special position in any organization. The board can ask you to leave at any time if you seem to be a liability, and the mere optics of a PR issue can be enough.

That's why CEOs often have such generous compensation packages in the event of involuntary termination.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#40

Post by iplaw » Wed, Apr 12, 2017, 1:03 PM UTC

fmitchell0 wrote: post #27

There is an important point that is being missed in this conversation. There are facts that are undisputed by both sides of the argument: - Should a person have a right to privacy? Yes - Should a person be discriminated based on their beliefs? No - Should a person in leadership be forced to expose their private life? No There are two questions, however, that is causing everyone to trip over themselves and table-flip:…

This is a truly personal matter that, in my opinion, bears no relevance to his public-facing leadership role and responsibilities. He's into BDSM, so what? If your PornHub/xHamster/whatever search history was exposed, how catastrophic would it be to your career? Would people that you respect immediately feign disgust, knowing very well that they have similar search histories? It's easy to point the finger when it's someone else taking the heat, but I guarantee that everyone who claims to be a member of the opposition would sing a different tune if it was their private life that was investigated and exposed. Pure hypocrisy.

It's GamerGate type shit all over again, chock full of faux outrage and manufactured drama. I think that sensational journalism has rubbed off on society. People are used to having their emotions exploited and being force fed specific facts sans context to steer their opinion and, at large, public consensus.

Instead of it being CNN steering the public opinion of Trump, it's a group of misdirected, misguided, uneducated, incompatible, unaccepting, pig-headed SJW-type individuals steering the dialogue regarding Drupal.