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

191–200 of 412 posts

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#191

Post by mwfunk »

binaryapparatus wrote: post #31

Being politically correct vs getting the job done, I'll always choose getting the job done. There is plenty or role playing projects where your feeling matter more than your skills. In last couple of jobs I am always asking about company policy, if they start piling about diversity and getting everybody heard and how everybody's feelings are most important thing, I don't want to work there. Earn your place with your…

All of this stuff is in service of getting the job done. If people can't usefully collaborate with other people because they literally never developed adult social skills (not uncommon in the tech world), then they're not going to be good contributors or collaborators. They won't know how to constructively criticize others, or take constructive criticism, they won't learn from their mistakes, and they might not even learn the right lessons from others' mistakes. The organization as a whole suffers, which is a lot worse than any individual not getting what they want.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#192

Post by dang »

frogeg wrote: post #147
Spivak wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking counter to not only RMS but also the tide of popular opinion not only on HN but the internet at large I'm sure takes a lot of courage -- and I just want to say thank you.

People who avoid saying what they think because they are afraid of losing internet points are retarded to begin with.

We've banned this account. Please don't create accounts to break the site guidelines with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#193

Post by KirinDave »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #174
KirinDave wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is the paragraph that captures the essence of the CoC issues for me. A CoC seems to be used as a weapon for killing those that do not abide by its rules, not as a tool for teaching each other to be awesome to each other. Can I ask an honest question? Do you really think that men advocating for molestation of women, or open racists, are just... you know... undereducated and waiting for you as a thought-savior t…

Fascinating, a polite citation of statistics and analyses by Mr. Ts'o, one from a government organization and another from a university, is somehow characterized a defense of one of the most heinous acts imaginable? I also encourage HN readers to examine the link KirinDave provided, as he himself suggests, as well as the documents actually linked to. It rather revelatory how at odds the hyperbole directed at Mr. Ts'o…

> Fascinating, a polite citation of statistics and analyses by Mr. Ts'o, one from a government organization and another from a university, is somehow characterized a defense of one of the most heinous acts imaginable?

Could you point to the specific document Ts'o was citing that suggests statutory rape not be bundled with other rape statistics? His very literal conclusion is that bundling these should be considered misleading.

> Is permitting people with biases so extreme to write CoCs what we really want?

Quite remarkable how you take me to task for hyperbole and then try to raft my personal opinion to the Linux CoC, of which I have absolutely 0 connection. One need not be a particularly astute reader to note what a dishonest tactic this is.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#194

Post by dang »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #115
kadendogthing wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How much damage have Linus's snippy emails really caused Don't downplay how he acted by using words like "snippy." There are contributors who have either left the project or actively avoid directly talking with him. There is a reason why Linus admitted he had a problem. It wasn't productive or useful. https://plus.google.com/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/post... >But more importantly, I'd actually put some blame o…

Systemd, invented by the guy you are quoting, is, however, objectively crap. I am about to start a separate, new service and have wide leeway in how it will run. I am moving away from Linux towards a mix of BSD and Solaris/Illumos. And Systemd played a part in this technical decision.

Please let's not have all the flamewars here.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#195

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

mcguire wrote: post #157
defgeneric wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> correcting the biases, conscious or not This insipid attitude was destructive when it first appeared during the academic "culture wars" of the 1980s. It's also extremely authoritarian--everyone is already guilty, not merely of incorrect conscious thoughts, but also unconscious thoughts!

Please do not take a harsh tone towards other participants, and especially don't make personal attacks against them. Go out of your way to show that you are criticizing a statement, not a person. Please avoid statements about the presumed typical desires, capabilities or actions of some demographic group. They can offend people in that group, and they are always off-topic in GNU Project discussions.

No personal attacks were made; the posting individual was not even mentioned. Arguing against an opposing idea is permitted.

No demographic groups were mentioned. Academics are not a demographic group, save possibly in the most academic possible interpretation of the word, and are certainly not a protected demographic group.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#196

Post by haberman »

KirinDave wrote: post #87
phoe-krk wrote: post #5

A code of conduct states rules, with punishments for anyone that violates them. It is the heavy-handed way of teaching people to behave differently, and since it only comes into action when people do something against the rules, it doesn't try to teach people to do better than what the rules require. To be sure, the appointed maintainer(s) of a GNU package can, if necessary, tell a contributor to go away; but we do n…

> That is the paragraph that captures the essence of the CoC issues for me. A CoC seems to be used as a weapon for killing those that do not abide by its rules, not as a tool for teaching each other to be awesome to each other. Can I ask an honest question? Do you really think that men advocating for molestation of women, or open racists, are just... you know... undereducated and waiting for you as a thought-savior t…

I don't think Ted Ts'o is a "rape apologist", nor a "reprehensible person." I don't think that calling him that is "educating people", I think it is expressing a particular narrative and world view, one I happen to disagree with.

I agree that communities should be able to set standards for themselves. However, are you willing to accept that not everyone agrees with your personal standards? Many people would not agree with the way you have characterized Ts'o above -- should such people get a say in setting the community standards also?

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#197

Post by stordoff »

ubernostrum wrote: post #49
fossdev wrote: post #39

Diversity as a goal is fundamentally flawed. It is what leads to policies like "affirmative action" which are in themselves simply a form of reverse discrimination.

Affirmative action is about noticing that a system was biased against a particular group of people, and attempting to counteract the bias. For example: if Group X is historically discriminated against, and you can quantify the resulting bias (which may not be conscious) such that on a 100-point school admission scale it works out to on average a 5-point disadvantage, adding some points based on membership in that gro…

> And if you believe discrimination should be banished, when will you be showing up to protest schools which give preferential admission to "legacies" (descendants or other kin of alumni)

I feel like this is a strawman - fossdev didn't say he agreed with such things.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#198

Post by trhway »

pjc50 wrote: post #88
whatshisface wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much damage have Linus's snippy emails really caused, in light of how they have benefited us? I and many other people like reading them because they are fun, so you have to take that in to account. Different people like different things, and that principle extends to writing styles and personalities. Indeed, if you really want to have diversity you should have some emails that I like to read in addition to having…

It's not about whether you "like" to read them or not, it's about whether the people they're directed at (and the audience) read them and decide to withdraw from the project (or never join it).

good software engineering requires some minimal level of mental strength, and if a one cant take a snippy (in the one's opinion as in my opinion Linus' emails are very reasonable, precise and thorough explanatorial) email i'd question whether that one would be a valuable member at all.

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#199

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #90

When 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…

>That said, I think he's wrong to devalue quota type approaches, because in some circumstances, particularly institutional ones in business and government, those are a very effective way to force a noncompliant culture to take its thumb off the scales.

Only for those groups who have a quota to ensure their fair representation. How often has there been a quota to fix well documented discrimination like that against those who are high functioning autistic?

Re: Announcing the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

#200

Post by mschuster91 »

wpietri wrote: post #15

On the one hand, I'm glad that he's at least acknowledging that this is a problem. It's disappointing to me that he talks about the problem as if people first noticed it in August, when I've heard it discussed for a decade or more. But still, baby steps. There's also a crashing lack of self-awareness here. This bit sounds great: "The only political positions that the GNU Project endorses are (1) that users should hav…

> E.g., it was only in May he declared it important to keep a stale joke about American politics in the code

Given Kavanaugh in the Supreme Court and the ever more massive fight of "pro lifers" and other religious hardcore bigots to ban abortions and thus invade the right of womens' bodily autonomy, that joke is everything but stale, and not even restricted to the USA!

As a matter of fact, in Germany a doctor (Kristina Hänel) right now is being prosecuted by the state for simply stating on her website that she offers abortion services. Therefore, the "joke" is actually reminding people of basic human rights, and is perfectly legit to keep in the code.

Post reply on HN