A CoC in any other name is still a CoC. A very thin end of a wedge is stil the end of a wedge.
A wedge towards... what? Polite and professional behavior isn't a bad thing.
Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
101–110 of 412 posts
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#102I've been experimenting with the idea that good code/design/whatever technical is RARELY more important than good work environment and professional relationships. My intuition tells me that you'll end up with a worse off product being developed more slowly if you focus on good code at all costs. That's not to say you should become a team that focuses on feelings.
I had a manager once entirely shut down code reviews because he felt it was hurting people's feelings. There's a right balance to strike and I really don't think that was it.
My thought is that when you're somewhere near that balance and aren't sure, lean towards good relationships, over good code. This generally happens at the moment when I have to decide just how nitpicky I should be about something, often minor.
The problem is that I'm no industry veteran. I don't have a lot of experience or hard facts to back this idea. But I just "feel" that it might be true.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#103So, I read through the list of guidelines, and while I have some minor quibbles with them, overall they seem fine and reasonable. But what happens if someone refuses to be kind? What happens if that person is a major contributor? What would happen if, in some strange alternate reality, Linux was a GNU project, and Linus-of-2012 said he'd really rather not care about all this politeness nonsense, and would prefer to c…
This is just a more verbose "Be kind to each other", but without any commitment from the leadership of the project to actually maintain a kind, welcoming environment.
"Be kind, generous, and accepting, or there will be consequences!" is just a few steps removed from, "The beatings will continue until morale improves."
The conundrum with linux, was that it was organized in a self-contradicting way. It's fine to have a meritocratic leader who is exacting and demanding, even harsh. You just don't mix that up with an ethos of accepting all contributors in public. Instead, there needs to be a public tier which is concerned more with outreach, and only once people are ready for the next level, should they be given access to the level where they have to stand and deliver.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#104Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#105What seems to be lacking is a viral clause so that when you 'be excellent to each other' the others are also required to abide by the same code of conduct.
That is an excellent observation! In a sense, copyleft is the most inclusive code of conduct ever devised.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#106Is it really this complicated to treat other people with respect?
I think part of the problem is that everyone has different definitions of respect.
For example, some people find it disrespectful to correct someone if they use a word wrong, but I find it disrespectful if someone doesn't correct me.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#107As 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 peopl…
I rolled my eyes as soon as I saw the subject line in my inbox this morning. This is the culmination of an extremely frustrating internal GNU discussion. RMS has not handled this situation appropriately at all.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#108Side 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…
Likely because its an official announcement rather than a "personal" email. eg when libreboot left GNU he didn't include it there either:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2017-01/msg00001....
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#109When people are arguing for "diversity" what they are meaning, generally, is "there is already an enormous thumb on the scales, this can be shown empirically by outcomes". So to the extent Stallman's intent is to take the thumb off the scales and make everyone welcome, it is very reasonable. That said, I think he's wrong to devalue quota type approaches, because in some circumstances, particularly institutional ones…
> force a noncompliant culture
The problem, as many see it, is that force ought not be used as a persuasion.
Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
#110"Rather, the
problem is that if we make demographic D feel unwelcome, we lose out
on possible contributors. And very likely also others that are not in
demographic D."
I think that hits the nail on the head as to why a lot of these initiatives are a good thing: If you make things more welcoming overall, more people of all walks of life feel more likely to contribute.