Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

drupalconfessions.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 341 posts

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#131

Post by pryelluw »

nebabyte wrote: post #125
pryelluw wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My question is: Who gets to define whats controversial? Everyone has an agenda. Seems to be that whoever is best at getting people outraged gets to control them.

The person in charge "Well who gets to decide who's in charge" Whoever takes charge. It's like they're missing the point of OSS. If you don't like who's in charge, remix and make your own. Whoever is the more capable leader will have a successful project. "Beliefs" and all that other crap get left at the door, the race is for the medal - in this case whoever has the best project wins. Though I suppose trying to achie…

By applying your explanation it could be that this whole situation is a power grab from people who want to take over the project. Does that make sense?

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#132

Post by vertex-four »

andoon wrote: post #62
IGI-111 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As usual, depends on the contents of the code. That kind of legalese is just tooling to organize discourse. You won't build an open minded community if its rules mandate righthink. Doesn't mean you can't try and protect people from the kind of stalking and abuse that has happened here. It's a shame that we have to have more than "be professional and don't be a dick" as community guidelines, but if we have to might as…

Someone who doesn't know that he has to "be professional and don't be a dick" is likely to disregard the code of conduct. And you don't need a code of conduct to kick someone out of a project because he's being unprofessional and/or a dick. Therefore codes of conduct are useless.

> And you don't need a code of conduct to kick someone out of a project because he's being unprofessional and/or a dick.

Unfortunately, my experience is that you actually do need to be able to point to something (a) precise and (b) that the community broadly agrees is a valid reason, in order to kick someone out without practically dissolving your community. A code of conduct is simply an agreement which states the community's beliefs on what are valid reasons to kick someone out.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#133

Post by humanrebar »

noir_lord wrote: post #81
speeder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Larry is Gorean Goreans are people that agree with philosophy of professor John Lange, that writes his philosophy in porn books with pen name John Norman What got Larry kicked out is that similarly to Abrahamic religions, Goreans believe there is an inherent hierarchy between men and women. Or at least it is what Dries (Drupal leader) wrote as explanation for the incident. So Larry is being punished literally for "wr…

> Goreanism is not a religion, so probably doesn't count as religious discrimination. I've often wondered what the difference between a Cult and a Religion is and my best answer seems to be "4 orders of magnitude". 1000 is a cult, 10,000,000 is a Religion. If it's a numbers game then everyone religion went through a stage where it was a cult (and indeed if you look at the history of religion lots of them where treat…

"Cult" is perjorative. It implies an unhealthy worldview and probably abusive leadership. People would infer that people in the "religions are just big cults" camp see those properties in all religions. If you care to espouse that viewpoint, you're on the right track.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#134

Post by manarth »

Pxtl wrote: post #92
Udo wrote: post #44

Expanding on one of the comments that might clear up what we're actually talking about (which wasn't made especially clear otherwise): >> "The Gorean philosophy promoted by Larry is based on the principle that women are evolutionarily predisposed to serve men and that the natural order is for men to dominate and lead." Even assuming this is Larry's philosophy, it is pretty much the same philosophy shared by many wome…

This is where professionalism is important. Firmly separating your personal life and your professional life. That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Many people come from backgrounds with bigoted ideas like that, but they don't colour their daily lives with it because they're not actively married…

  Marvel Comics recently fired an illustrator for hiding Islamist,
  anti-Semitic and anti-Christian references in his art.
It wasn't exactly his art in which the references were hidden - it was Marvel's art. He hid the references in comic panels, commissioned by Marvel and designed specifically for publication in a Marvel comic.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#135

Post by nebabyte »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #82
ekianjo wrote: post #33

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.

Totally agree. I'm fed up of the argument that goes "if you preach tolerance, you must be tolerant of intolerance", for my own understanding of tolerance. Yes, you shouldn't commit a violent act against someone because they are intolerant. No, you shouldn't have to accept their intolerance unreservedly. I also have an issue with the part of the statement that reads along the lines of "we are against discrimination ba…

So then how do you deal with people with such beliefs in your society? Do you shun them, throw slurs at them? What happens when one moves in to be your next-door neighbor? Do you try moving to places without them?

Intolerance of beliefs is incompatible with society, and society has shown no signs of changing. How would your solution address that? Indoctrination? Building an ideological "wall"? Killing those who do not meet your ideology, or wait and hope it 'dies out'?

What happens when they elect someone with such beliefs to lead you?

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#136

Post by stillhere »

dullgiulio wrote: post #43
Flow wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The key is "tolerance" and "inclusion". Those are, of course, superior to intolerance and exclusion. To have tolerance, you cannot tolerate intolerance. It is maybe illogical, but necessary.

I value free speech more than I value the system you're advocating. If "hate speech" is limited it becomes too easy to define anything you don't like as hate speech. Like Chronicles of Gor.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#137

Post by jolux »

crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #68
dullgiulio wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key is "tolerance" and "inclusion". Those are, of course, superior to intolerance and exclusion. To have tolerance, you cannot tolerate intolerance. It is maybe illogical, but necessary.

I'd argue allowing some intolerance is required because no system is 100% anything. Your comment shows the exact sort of thinking the people you're responding to are going off on. The issue is people are trying to implement nonviolent communication principles in communities without learning how to process the world through the lens of nonviolent communication. And others are using the natural misunderstandings as evi…

Karl Popper wrote on this subject and I've yet to find a suitable rebuttal. The intolerant cannot be tolerated because doing so would lead to the elimination of tolerance. His justification is whether the intolerant are willing to discuss things rationally or whether they will steamroll you without any concern for intellectual integrity.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#138

Post by jacquesm »

manarth wrote: post #134
Pxtl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where professionalism is important. Firmly separating your personal life and your professional life. That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Many people come from backgrounds with bigoted ideas like that, but they don't colour their daily lives with it because they're not actively married…

Marvel Comics recently fired an illustrator for hiding Islamist, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian references in his art. It wasn't exactly his art in which the references were hidden - it was Marvel's art . He hid the references in comic panels, commissioned by Marvel and designed specifically for publication in a Marvel comic.

That's a practice that is as old as Michelangelo.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#139

Post by kazagistar »

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:…

You phrased your last two questions entirely differently from the first three. The first ones are global moral questions, for which answers can exist in the sense of personal opinions, groip consensus, etc. Meanwhile the latter ones are questions about individual behavior based on belonging to a group; there are no global answers. So the answer to both that I would suggest is:

Maybe, it depends on the individual. However, it is immoral to discriminate based on categories rather then individual characteristics, so their private life should not affect our actions towards them.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#140

Post by samirillian »

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 actually sure what you're getting at. I have two theories:

a) You are implying that this article is an exception to the rule,

b) This article is an example of the rule insofar as you can believe anything at all insofar as "practical" conformity is enforced regardless?

Post reply on HN