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

New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

freebsd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 156 posts

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#91

Post by malvosenior »

soyiuz wrote: post #89
malvosenior wrote: post #42

> Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion. Harassment should be harassment, no? Does it matter if the perpetrator is "reinforcing systemic oppression" or just being obnoxious? Why put this clause in here? Will it be enforced when someone says "ki…

When "killing all men" type of behavior becomes problematic you will have a point. The problem has been that some people don't understand what "being obnoxious" is and need it spelled out for them. Because men have not been historically a target of oppression, the explanation now has the language that it does, using actual examples / lines of harassment.

And this is what I mean by dragging politics into an open source project where it doesn't belong.

> When "killing all men" type of behavior becomes problematic you will have a point.

Every time someone "ironically" tweets this, it's a problem. I've yet to see a CoC used effectively to stop it.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#92

Post by klipt »

soyiuz wrote: post #80
klipt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's vague and hand wavey. Their definitions are ripe for abuse and I'm sure someone will create e.g. an app for female rape victims and argue that excluding male rape victims is fine because "you can't be sexist against men."

Your hypothetical worry about "excluding male rape victims" is strongly outweighed by the needs of actual rape victims.

Your assumption that male rape victims aren't "actual" rape victims is exactly the kind of sexism I was referring to.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#93

Post by mwfunk »

rurban wrote: post #21
jdp23 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah really! cperciva had a great tweet on this a few days ago: "Probably the most important thing to keep in mind when reading the FreeBSD Code of Conduct is that we weren't trying to change any rules. Rather, we were trying to elaborate on the rule under which the FreeBSD project has operated for years: Don't Be An Asshole."

It rather looks like an elaboration on the rule: "be free to label your critic as asshole"

Well that's easy to avoid- don't give anyone ammunition with which to dismiss you as an asshole. It's totally unrelated to whether or not someone really is an asshole. It's trivially easy, and if it's not trivially easy, well that's a big giant glowing arrow pointing at an impending personal growth opportunity with a reward:effort ratio that's off the charts.

Whether or not someone is an actual asshole, the ability to avoid misunderstandings is critical to moving forward and getting stuff done and not wasting time on distractions and petty arguments. CoC's are simply an organization's defense mechanism against pointless interpersonal chaos that doesn't belong on their mailing lists (or whatever) in the first place.

Source: genetically inclined to be a total and complete asshole, have spent the last few decades trying to get better though.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#94

Post by rdiddly »

soyiuz wrote: post #33
whatshisface wrote: post #20

> Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion. So, there's a lot of "politicking" going on back and forth over this, but I'd like to suggest a specific problem: by attempting to formalize what used to be intuition, you're opening the door for people…

Possibly. But the benefits outweigh the marginal scenario you are envisioning. I again return to the example of HN, which has higher standards of conversation than many other boards, due in part to strong moderating guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html To draw a parallel, do you think HN would be more successful if it relied on "intuition" for norms of discussion?

Not the original commenter, but I don't believe that was the point (to suggest abolishing rules in favor of intuition or to compare the pros & cons of the two). I read it as a simple observation that codifying things, writing them down, is hard, especially that which is (debatably) "known intuitively." And I think anyone can affirm this who has ever tried to write a law, a computer program based on business rules and tribal knowledge, or this selfsame FreeBSD code of conduct. It's surprisingly hard to describe and define things that previously fell under "we know it when we see it." That's why if a contractor gets hired to build a building the contract is 20 pages but the specs are 2,000 pages. For every word that says "build a building," there are 6 that are there strictly to remove wiggle-room.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#95

Post by [deleted] »

coldtea wrote: post #52
rayiner wrote: post #2

This is great: simple and easy to understand. For everyone feigning confusion about modern professional behavioral norms, just memorize this list.

Or "anyone not familiar with the fashionable norms du jour, here's a list of potential thought crimes as derived by one country's culture (and its internal conflicts, cultural politics, and religious and post-religious baggage) and imposed on supposedly global communities".

[deleted]

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#96

Post by soyiuz »

Caveman_Coder wrote: post #87
soyiuz wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CoCs are useful for coordination among large, non-local, diverse communities. Have you considered that instead of "purposefully want[ing] to stir up discord" for funding the rules are meant to reduce the incidence of actual harassment/abuse? Or to promote inclusivity? How does an articulation of values "stir up discord?" I can point you to numerous examples of harassment and inequity in the tech community. Can you po…

> "Can you point me to an example of "discord" brought about by better rules of conduct? Or to this funding that you mention?" Only my wife's anecdotal experience...she was a full-time software developer and the companies she worked for routinely tried to use her as an example in their "we support women in tech" PR. She hated it and said it felt degrading. Also, there were various "women in tech" groups that reached…

That's a great example. Someone (like your wife) may be bothered by being contacted by pushy activist groups and then even castigated for not participating. We weigh that against systematic income inequality and sexual harassment along gender lines.

It seems like that minor inconvenience is worth the net benefit to the community, from which your wife benefits (for example, by being legally protected against sexual discrimination in the workplace).

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#97

Post by ygaf »

aap_ wrote: post #10

This makes me sad. Do people really need to be told what not to do and say like that? To me it feels insulting that I am not trusted to be nice to others.

>Do people really need to be told what not to do and say like that?

There isn't any evidence of it. On the other hand the language in the CoC itself is evidence that it comes from busybodies.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#98

Post by HumanDrivenDev »

soyiuz wrote: post #33
whatshisface wrote: post #20

> Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion. So, there's a lot of "politicking" going on back and forth over this, but I'd like to suggest a specific problem: by attempting to formalize what used to be intuition, you're opening the door for people…

Possibly. But the benefits outweigh the marginal scenario you are envisioning. I again return to the example of HN, which has higher standards of conversation than many other boards, due in part to strong moderating guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html To draw a parallel, do you think HN would be more successful if it relied on "intuition" for norms of discussion?

> I again return to the example of HN, which has higher standards of conversation than many other boards

Do you truly think so?

I like it here well enough, don't get me wrong. But I don't know that replacing flame wars with passive aggressiveness - which is essentially what HNs moderation does - is a great tradeoff.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#99

Post by mwcampbell »

soyiuz wrote: post #96
Caveman_Coder wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Can you point me to an example of "discord" brought about by better rules of conduct? Or to this funding that you mention?" Only my wife's anecdotal experience...she was a full-time software developer and the companies she worked for routinely tried to use her as an example in their "we support women in tech" PR. She hated it and said it felt degrading. Also, there were various "women in tech" groups that reached…

That's a great example. Someone (like your wife) may be bothered by being contacted by pushy activist groups and then even castigated for not participating. We weigh that against systematic income inequality and sexual harassment along gender lines. It seems like that minor inconvenience is worth the net benefit to the community, from which your wife benefits (for example, by being legally protected against sexual di…

Still, those pushy activists should see the GP's wife as a person with her own interests, priorities, and desire to be left alone, not just a token [insert group identity here]. A generalized version of what I just said might even make a good item in a CoC.

Re: New FreeBSD Code of Conduct

#100

Post by soyiuz »

klipt wrote: post #92
soyiuz wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your hypothetical worry about "excluding male rape victims" is strongly outweighed by the needs of actual rape victims.

Your assumption that male rape victims aren't "actual" rape victims is exactly the kind of sexism I was referring to.

I did not gender my example. Check your logic. You wrote "I'm sure someone will create an app" etc. My point is that your hypothetical example of a potential future bias is outweighed by the preponderance of existing evidence today.
Post reply on HN