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

I Violated a Code of Conduct

fast.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 971 posts

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#871

Post by sk2020 »

akiselev wrote: post #794
sk2020 wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretend-legal agreements that are overly broad, capriciously enforced and written by out-of-touch culture “warriors” are a bad joke that should be regarded with contempt. Let the attorneys do their job, and devs, or the pop-dev-blogger entourage, should do theirs.

> Pretend-legal agreements that are overly broad, capriciously enforced and written by out-of-touch culture “warriors” are a bad joke that should be regarded with contempt > Let the attorneys do their job The foundation of labor law in this country was built thanks to out-of-touch culture “warriors” and their lawyers going back to the early 1900s.

Attorneys aren’t writing these Codes of Conduct.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#872

Post by throwaway894345 »

wrsh07 wrote: post #855
throwaway894345 wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it literally has never happened, so much as that it's very, very rare. Moreover, that kind of behavior would get you banned irrespective of any CoC, so the question remains: what does a CoC add here?

> I have never seen it happen in my 10 years in open source Seems like a very generous reading of what the person I'm specifically responding to said

I don’t see how you can possibly think that. Saying that you’ve never experienced something is not a claim that no one has ever experienced that thing. Mine is not a generous interpretation, but rather I’m not going out of my way to infer some nefarious subtext.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#873

Post by andreasvc »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #701
nl wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Yeah I know it was actually the mask advocacy and not the talk itself.) Is that what actually caused the complaints?

> Is that what actually caused the complaints? Given that the complainers were anonymous (thanks to the CoC process), we'll never know. But it seems like a reasonable guess.

Why would we never know? Quoting from the blog post: "The specific reasons given were that [...]" followed by a bullet list. Your guess is unwarranted speculation.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#874

Post by HideousKojima »

tstrimple wrote: post #837
commandlinefan wrote: post #724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why NOT formalize rules to some extent? Besides the reams of examples of CoC's being abused and arbitrarily enforced like the one in the attached article you mean? I've never even heard of a CoC being applied in any way except a petty, bureaucratic way.

> I've never even heard of a CoC being applied in any way except a petty, bureaucratic way. Sounds like a classic case of selection bias.

Entirely possible, but it's impossible to tell because most of these committees and panels are completely opaque about their actions. Hence the need for standards from common law like not allowing anonymous accusations, etc.

Or just get rid of them

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#875

Post by esyir »

mcv wrote: post #773
HideousKojima wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why NOT formalize rules to some extent? Because, at least in the case of CoCs in open source, the sorts of people most vocally pushing to implement and enforce them are almost invariably of the sort most likely to use them as political weapons and enforce them lopsidedly.

The problem here, though, is inconsistent enforcement. Assuming this side of the story is correct, he didn't actually violate the CoC at all, and the committee he spoke to did. The problem here is not the CoC, it's that the organisation doesn't enforce the CoC, violates it, and punishes people who didn't violate it. They might as well not have a CoC in that case.

His point, at least as I grok it, is that the coc can be perfect in wording, but due to the nature and incentives of its birth, he sees it as more a weapon that a rigorous and fair standard.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#877

Post by trhway »

tester34 wrote: post #473
trhway wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is a luxury of modern times. Century and more ago only upper classes were having debates/arguments/discussions because only they had the option to try to control their fate by trying to win those debates (and those white males had less diverse set of opinions then we have in the society today). The rest of society was consumed in daily grit for survival, they had no impact on decisions and whatever decisions were…

>(and those white males had less diverse set of opinions then we have in the society today). how's skin color relevant here?

absolutely relevant. 1-2 centuries ago the deciding top of the society were mostly white males. That naturally leaded to the less diverse set of opinions held by them. Or do you think Jim Crow, etc. would have the same history if black people were part of the deciding elite 150-100 years ago?

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#878

Post by robbyoconnor »

Strom wrote: post #649
Deflect wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you see he didn't care? https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/1321627567737069568?s=19 he said their decision was fucked up.

The phrase didn't care in this context means that he was OK with his opinion being called wrong, not that he literally doesn't care either way.

Precisely what was said above is what I meant.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#879

Post by wrsh07 »

skohan wrote: post #816
wrsh07 wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've never seen racist trolling on GitHub, maybe it's because you're not looking rather than that it doesn't happen The laziest of Google searches quickly found people being racist on GitHub (... to a GitHub employee! With their own, non anonymous accounts!): https://www.tinykat.cafe/on-all-that-fuckery (This incident also made it to hn iirc, but maybe you didn't read it that day)

To be fair, the article in question is not about a software project, it's about an individual who is using github as a food blog being trolled using the github collaboration features. It's an example of horrible online behavior, but I don't think it's relevant to OSS communities.

I can understand how you might think that code repos are different from other social media sites.

However, they aren't. They require moderation because people are rude even when not anonymous.

Here's a quote from the vscode repo moderators:

> We deleted a handful of comments which we deemed too offensive to leave as-is (foul language, racist remarks, etc.). We also deleted a few issues that were overwhelmingly offensive. Unfortunately, that resulted in some non-offensive comments within those issues being deleted as well.

https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/87440

Surely you can't continue to claim that open source communities do not suffer from such issues, now, right?

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#880

Post by apta »

elric wrote: post #444
brigandish wrote: post #347

I've never seen a CoC used to help protect a community, only to protect certain already powerful members within a community and give them a tool with which to beat others. Lately I've been actively avoiding giving my time to open source projects that have CoC's like the Contributor Covenant[1], mainly because - if my experience is anything to go by - they are a strong signal that the kind of people I wish to avoid wi…

I've been wondering about this. Obviously there's a demand for CoCs coming from somewhere, or there wouldn't be a supply of them. What is driving this demand? Is this demand driven by good intentions? By a genuine desire to improve diversity? To attract those who might otherwise feel less safe? Is this demand driven by a "fear of being left out" because big names in tech are setting an example? Is this demand entirel…

> Obviously there's a demand for CoCs coming from somewhere

It's coming from SJW's and similar far leftists who virtue signal. Yet people keep pandering to them, and now they're paying the price.

Post reply on HN