91–100 of 201 posts
/r/linux has been full of arguments about this recently. The moderation team claims that many of the people arguing against the CoC appear to be new to /r/linux. > We have noticed a large influx of accounts this past week that have never commented or posted in /r/Linux before. We have also seen a large number of accounts being created just to comment on these posts. ~ /u/Kruug From https://aa.reddit.com/r/linux/comme…
I am a Linux developer and contributor for a few decades and the code of conduct simply killed any interest in contributing to it. It won't take long until backdoors are introduced on Linux. Activists that joined the community for money will have full control and the ability of banning any criticism. We really need Linus back.
Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? If a code of conduct hurts your feelings that much maybe you're just not cut out for collaborative work. I really wonder where the great fear that CoCs will be abused to shut down disagreement comes from. I am not a fan of policing language, but there just aren't many real examples of such abuse out there. Here is the actual list of examples from the…
Who gets to decide what's "decent"? Do you not realize that what you just wrote can be considered [inappropriate], a [personal attack] and/or [trolling]? Do it once more, perhaps unwittingly, and you're a repeat offender. Three strikes and you are out. If I like you (or rather your politics align with mine), I won't use that weapon against you, but it's in my power to do so.
Look into what led to the Ayo.js/node.js fork, it was basically caused by R.V. posting on his personal twitter something against CoCs. He wasn't in line with the politics of certain other members. In that case, sanity prevailed, but only narrowly.
For another example where that weapon was turned against the very person who brought it to the table, look into what happened with J.K. and Lerna.
> But the whole "I can't contribute to this project anymore because I find SJWs offensive" whinging strikes me as deeply hypocritical.
Nobody actually is saying that. You're just misrepresenting the argument in a [derogatory] manner. That's pretty [insulting], isn't it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you know the term "red-pilled" comes from a movie written by two trans women? Really makes you think.
> Really makes you think. Oh yea? What about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That list, by the way, is a list of projects run by people who bowed to pressure and didn’t really think it thru or believed the lies pushed by those pushing the CoC. Are you implying that those who support a CoC are lying or somehow not "strong" enough to oppose it? You've stated elsewhere [0] your objection that people who oppose a CoC are implied to be bigoted. And yet here you are assuming that those who have n…
I don’t see the contradiction. Just look at any of the commit threads onva prohect where opposition to the CoC is discussed. They fly in “developers” who claim they don’t feel included and bully the maintainer to accept it, often straight up violating their own code in the process. But then as the original agreement says there is no racism against whites people and no sexism against men.
Where does it say that? Here is the full text of the CoC: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-con...
I really, genuinely, don't understand why such a bland code of conduct would be a turn off to anyone. I may not be easy to be around, but I try not to be abrasive while, at the same time, making clear why I think something is the way I think. If you think someone is wrong very often, I believe saying why the person is wrong on every occasion will provide them with actionable information much better than calling them…
Agree. Open Source values will still remain - working in a transparent, open (not always nice) way. More with CoC, harassing people will not be tolerated
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. There’s a half dozen there I used to contribute to... and one I didn’t realize had adopted it. If I ever need to add a feature to one of them I’ll have to fork it. But I think that it needs a “no CoC” license. That list, by the way, is a list of projects run by people who bowed to pressure and didn’t really think it thru or believed the lies pushed by those pushing the CoC. I know this first hand for the project…
Any open source project that gains enough traction to require a proper governance model has adopted a code of conduct. (Although I'd be interested in seeing if there are any notable counter-examples). Whether or not it is based on the Contributor Covenant is irrelevant -- the language is roughly the same broad brush strokes with which you appear to have ideological differences. Do you take issue with the "Enforcement…
That sentence probably needs some adjustment for time dependence. There were plenty of open source projects with proper governance models in the 90s (e.g. GNU, Debian) but AFAIK CoCs are a relatively recent thing.
I really, genuinely, don't understand why such a bland code of conduct would be a turn off to anyone. I may not be easy to be around, but I try not to be abrasive while, at the same time, making clear why I think something is the way I think. If you think someone is wrong very often, I believe saying why the person is wrong on every occasion will provide them with actionable information much better than calling them…
This means you haven't read the article.
CoC encourages harrassment through doxing and witch-hunts. It actually has the opposite effect. You were rude to me on a bug tracker? I'll dox you and find something you said 5 years ago which is offensive and report it to the committee to get you banned.
The relevant snippet is here:
--------
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or advances
Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
Public or private harassment
Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic address, without explicit permission
Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
--------
i.e. the CoC explicitly mentions doxxing as against the CoC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don’t understand, maybe Consider the objections, instead of ( unintentionally) writing as if the people who object are presumed abusive or bigoted. That wasn’t your intention because you meant to just say you have no problem accepting criticism. But that’s the implication. And the idea of guilty until proven innocent, but you can’t defend yourself because you will never hear the accusation and your attacker ca…
And how does not having a CoC stop that? Like, if someone takes a dislike to someone, and they have sufficient power, they can remove them anyway.
Following one of these CoCs to the letter, I could levee infringements against practically anyone, even if I only made minor contributions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to say but proven until guilty and basic rights does not apply to everything in life (tax law, private endeavors, I can refuse service to someone, I can kick you out from my home without listening to you if I think you did something wrong). If someone is accusing you and they don't want to hear you, stop contributing. It is is not criminal justice. You are not obligated to spend your time fighting with assholes…
> If someone is accusing you and they don't want to hear you, stop contributing. You're assuming he's contributing privately and can stop at leisure.