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

891–900 of 971 posts

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#891

Post by ForHackernews »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #883
ForHackernews wrote: post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... uh yes? If you say "what the hell?" directly to a representative of that company, then you are literally using profanity at their staff. Like, we can disagree about whether that's a sensible rule or if we should make allowances for non-abusive colloquial phrases ('wtf', 'what the hell?', etc.) or something, but how can you argue it's not breaking the black-and-white rule as written?

>we should make allowances for non-abusive colloquial phrases ('wtf', 'what the hell?', etc.) or something, but how can you argue it's not breaking the black-and-white rule as written? Because 'swear at' at specifically means using a swear _against_ somebody, not just in a statement while talking to them. If you look at e.g. any of the definitions in the free dictionary, you'll find that they're all about using abusi…

You're splitting hairs with a diamond blade here if you're claiming that "What the hell is wrong with ?" doesn't count as, "utter[ing] a curse or similarly vulgar or abusive language toward someone or something." [from your link]

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#892

Post by pron »

bananaface wrote: post #623
pron wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realise conference organisers can do the very same thing without a code of conduct, right? That a code of conduct can be used as an "oppression tool" doesn't mean that its absence doesn't lead to even more "oppression". If you want to compare the relative merit of two things, like having a code or not, you need to consider both sides rather than just point out the perceived downsides of one.

If they do it without, they have to own the decision. The CoC provides plausible deniability that it was personal.

It also makes it less likely to actually be personal. I don't think anyone claims that due process is always free of bias and error, but that doesn't make it more likely to be more biased.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#893

Post by pron »

ALittleLight wrote: post #854
pron wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you read all the laws in your country? Are you aware that there are probably thousands of examples where they've been arbitrarily enforced and put innocent people in prison (or even executed them)? Many of them are just a matter of common sense and yet there's an entire apparatus around them. Does that mean they're silly and useless? I've never organised a conference, but people who have told me that there's a l…

Many laws are silly and useless. Many laws are ambiguous. Sometimes you read a law and think you know what it means but it turns out it applies where you don't expect and doesn't apply where you do expect. The law is complicated and expensive and painful. You need lawyers and judges and juries. People are, as you observe, severely hurt by the law. These are reasons why we don't need some pseudo sub-law drafted quickl…

Obviously there are pros and cons, but one cannot conclude that one way is worse than another if you only look at the bad outcomes of that one way. You need to compare the overall picture of both ways.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#894

Post by jawarner »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #886
jawarner wrote: post #867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes. Really? I thought it was more people being overly sensitive, and the enforcement team not using their brains. I think pindab0ter would agree that it was improper enforcement of the CoC. I'm not sure anybody can speak to the intentions of the people that reported it with certainty. > Well, if you dislike someone's political views, and then you hatch a plan to make up fraudulent sexual misconduct allegations wit…

> I think pindab0ter would agree that it was improper enforcement of the CoC. I'm not sure anybody can speak to the intentions of the people that reported it with certainty. Let's stop the speculation on what pindab0ter would or would not agree with. Clearly you and I interpret their message in completely different ways, so unless they want to come back to clarify their statement, let's just stop with the speculation…

pindab0ter said:

> This discussion is about someone being punished by a committee for something that wasn’t in the CoC, as you can read in the article.

I said:

> I think pindab0ter would agree that it was improper enforcement of the CoC

Does that seem like speculation? This thread is getting a little disjointed. We can't seem to agree on anything.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#895

Post by john4532452 »

I understand the good faith about CoC but it does not serve its intended purpose. CoC is a tool to wield the power that comes with the ability to program without having to work hard to acquire the skill to program. It makes me sick to see non programmers controlling the language of programmers.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#896

Post by hodgesrm »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #383
hodgesrm wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whatever manual interventions we had to make use of outrage before are like kids' play compared to the systems which automate this nowadays. I think you need to cite evidence for that view. There's a long history of terrible violence based on manipulation of religious animosity that predates the Internet. The Reformation movement in Germany triggered religious conflicts--incited by various secular powers--that last…

I'd guess it's more that in that time, the amount of incrimination and accusation you could have in a society before you had a civil war on your hands was lower. So you had more civil wars, but it also pushed people to stay quiet more. I think the reason we have so much criticism nowadays is how relatively limited the consequences are.

Well also there's the notion of freedom of speech, which is a relatively new development in the West. We tolerate speech today that would have resulted in gruesome execution in the reign of, say, the Tudor Kings of England. [1] These were not democracies. (Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding your point.)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason_Act_1351

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#897

Post by belorn »

nonfamous wrote: post #857
belorn wrote: post #847

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explicit rules that create and escalate conflict is worse than implicit rules that assumes good faith and gives benefit of the doubt. Not all explicit rules are good and not all implicit ones are bad, and it depend a great lot of how enforcement is made. Good formalized set of rules and rule enforcement focus on conflict resolution and deescalation, assumes good faith and give benefit of the doubt. Most legal system…

> From the article I don't see any attempt of conflict resolution between Joel Grus and Jeremy Howard. FTA: “I think Joel is great, and I know for a fact that he doesn’t mind being called “wrong” (since the call I checked with him).”

sorry, meant there were no attempt of conflict resolution by the Code of Conduct committee.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#898

Post by Cytobit »

username90 wrote: post #849
Volundr wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about every time dang replies "Please don't do this" and links to the HN rules? Or bans repeat offenders? You don't hear about the system working right because it's inherently non-controversial.

Guidelines != CoC. People break the HN guidelines all the time and it is fine, they are there to help make people become better contributors and not to punish people.

Seems like a No True Scotsman situation to me. A set of rules is just that.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#899

Post by btilly »

spacekitcat wrote: post #856
btilly wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, I would like to recommend http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html as background for what I object to about political correctness. Political correctness pushes the idea that the whole world should be trying to create a safe space for those who have had any kind of past challenge. There is a time and place for safe spaces. However the act of encouraging people to figure out what problems they can complain about, then…

In my country, "Political Correctness" is a dog whistle used by Daily Mail readers. It doesn't mean anything. I don't shape my thinking by what some talking head thinks. Why do you think I asked for a concrete example? I notice that you didn't provide one either.

Concrete examples of political correctness gone bad.

Censoring the OP for calling someone else wrong. (When the person called wrong is actually a friend and didn't object.)

Cisco firing employees for saying, "All lives matter."

Maya Forstater being fired for expressing the opinion that while she used people's preferred pronouns, she thought of trans people as their original gender if they still had their real genitalia.

Emmanuel Cafferty (a Mexican American) being fired for an alleged white supremacist hand gesture that he had never even HEARD of as a white supremacist hand gesture. (Also did I mention that he's not even white?)

Ongoing persecution of academics who dare research trans issues from any perspective that trans activists do not approve of. See https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/16/academics-ar... for more on that.

Is that enough examples for you?

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#900

Post by Cytobit »

barumi wrote: post #177
friendlybus wrote: post #28

Using CoC's to backstab people is not going to end well. Using CoC's to institute a heirarchy of 'who can criticize who' is going to be rebelled against. Some people are power hungry and use words to get power. They are exposing themselves in the silliest ways. Pure vanity.

> Using CoC's to backstab people is not going to end well. But that's their only usecase, isn't it? CoCs are just a convenient document aimed at helping out Cardinal Richelieus finding ways to hang you under the guise of breaking acceptable conduct. I mean, CoCs aren't aimed at changing people and make everyone nice. CoCs are aimed at providing a basis to persecute those who arguably don't comply with a given notion…

> But that's their only usecase, isn't it?

I thought they were used to codify acceptable and unacceptable conduct.

Post reply on HN