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

Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

lists.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 412 posts

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#21

Post by Spivak »

noch wrote: post #12
ekianjo wrote: post #2

> Please assume other participants are posting in good faith, even if you disagree with what they say. When people present code or text as their own work, please accept it as their work. Please do not criticize people for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done; stick to what they actually say and actually do. That's a breath of fresh air. There's always someone who tries to read between the lines and straw…

> There's always someone who tries to read between the lines and strawman people for what they did not say/express. The claim that there is always someone creating strawmen is itself the creation of a strawman. If you assume good faith of participants then it might be useful to assume good faith of those who criticise even if they misunderstand or misread or assume unwarranted implications.

I think this would be covered under assuming people are acting in good faith but I absolutely agree this is something that should be stated explicitly.

Don't treat someone who says they felt hurt or excluded as someone overly sensitive. Because even when someone gets the wrong impression you may find it valuable to reflect on why that impression was received in the first place.

And please don't treat people who try to point out exclusionary or hurtful language like they're your adversary or trying to control you -- it can be incredibly hard for people of disprivileged demographics to speak up for themselves. I have to rely on the defense of others constantly because when I speak for myself I'm not taken seriously.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#22

Post by okket »

avar wrote: post #3

Side note: This is the first E-Mail I've seen from Stallman in over 4 years that hasn't started with his usual boilerplate: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] See e.g. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2018-10/msg00... (just picked his…

Stallman without boilerplate, Linus without rants, what has the world become? Maybe, when everybody is loud and screaming in rage, the escapist role is the quiet, humble and introspect one.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#23

Post by carlmr »

hprotagonist wrote: post #7

This is a remarkably sane and cogent approach. His point about CoCs failing to encourage behavior “above and beyond” the rules is well made, and i hadn’t thought about that side of Goodheart’s Law in this setting before.

>Goodheart’s Law

Didn't know this one yet. Thank you for pointing it out. I'll bring it up on my next discussion on targeting 100% code coverage vs seeing it just as an indicator of insufficient tests.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#24

Post by morley »

marijn wrote: post #13

While it sounds very reasonable, friendly, and non-authoritarian, a big problem with an approach like this, without real teeth or rigidity, is that it is very easy to harass people out of a community while staying within its constraints, and provides very little recourse for those being harassed (who often are not in a position of power) to put on pressure for getting something done about it. The approach taken large…

I don't think any one action is going to completely fix what's wrong with society. But I do think these guidelines are likely make society _better_ and and unlikely to make them worse. This definitely should not be the last action taken to make society better, and I look forward to more actions along these same lines.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#25

Post by [deleted] »

noch wrote: post #12
ekianjo wrote: post #2

> Please assume other participants are posting in good faith, even if you disagree with what they say. When people present code or text as their own work, please accept it as their work. Please do not criticize people for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done; stick to what they actually say and actually do. That's a breath of fresh air. There's always someone who tries to read between the lines and straw…

> There's always someone who tries to read between the lines and strawman people for what they did not say/express. The claim that there is always someone creating strawmen is itself the creation of a strawman. If you assume good faith of participants then it might be useful to assume good faith of those who criticise even if they misunderstand or misread or assume unwarranted implications.

[deleted]

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#26

Post by VictorSCushman »

> The idea of the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines is to start guiding people towards kinder communication at a point well before one would even think of saying, "You are breaking the rules."

I really like this. I think it'll help the community become a more welcoming place overall without needing to view politeness as a rule set. I see this as an overall benefit to the GNU project, as well as to OSS as a whole.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#28

Post by civodul »

As co-maintainer of GNU Guix, I want to point out that the views expressed in Richard Stallman's message are his and not those of the Guix maintainers.

In particular, by writing that codes of conduct are "punitive spirit", RMS shows a misunderstanding of how these texts came into existence.

More importantly, by writing that he disagrees with "making diversity a goal", RMS seems to deny the role we free software people play in the demographics of our communities.

Many of us in Guix (and I think I can speak for my fellow Guix co-maintainer here) believe that free software should empower everyone. As such, correcting the biases, conscious or not, that have led to the poor diversity of our communities, must be part of our mission.

Post reply on HN