[flagged]
Can you please make your substantive points thoughtfully? You broke at least 3 of the site guidelines here.
Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
201–210 of 637 posts
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#202Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#203What's with the recurring comments about corporations and businesses? > Some people may have views that when expressed, may be harmful to the interest of particular groups of people like big corporations. This has to be taken into account. > universally accepted corporate values > That's California Core Corporate Policies in work > For instance, members of board of directors of the big corporations are a protected cl…
You are watching a master troll at work.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#204Almost more surprising is that this was removed: > When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants should always assume good intentions. In favor of this: > Participants should speak and act with good intentions, but understand that intent and impact are not equivalent. Also changed yesterday: > Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated. became: > Behaviour which ca…
These updates have a very nebulous definition of harassment. According to the new CoC, almost anything can be considered harassment. As far as the "intent and impact" of the intentions, assuming that someone acts in bad faith is a good way to turn a misunderstanding into actual hatred. Such a result should be considered worse than having to deal with a few bad apples who try to take advantage.
[deleted]
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#205.
Would you please stop breaking the HN guidelines? You did more than anyone to turn this thread into a flamewar, and that's exactly what we're trying to avoid here.
Replacing everything you posted with "." doesn't help.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just laying out exactly what you seem to agree with, and that good intentions aren't a shield for bad results. Someone might say "you look really sexy today" and intend it as a compliment, but even if it is a compliment it almost certainly isn't going to be received as one.
Is it laying that out? I think you have to significantly read between the lines to get there. > what you seem to agree with, that good intentions aren't a shield for bad results I wasn't giving my opinion so much as sumarizing its an unsolved problem with no obvious correct answer. If you want my personal view. I don't believe actual results should be taken into account at all. "you look really sexy today" isn't wron…
"Now now Sally, everyone knows before we can talk to another human, unless you are a protected class, you have to sign an interaction receival request. Don't be scared honey, only about half of all interaction receival requests are deemed offensive by the receiver, and punishable by removal of the tongue. Besides, how do you expect daddy to get another loaf of bread if I don't request one from our local CoC Kommando?
I need you to be brave in this world, as right now you are a protected class, you can bargain on my behalf. Please go to the entity presiding over that area and beg them/their/it/they to be sparing with the interaction receival request litigation fees."
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#207I think this is a big difference between US and EU. In EU we like to joke around, tease each other, and not get fired over that. When we tell a sexist joke with a woman present, you will get a witty reply from them, not a call to HR. I hope this US bullshit stays in US. Seems that EU women are not victims but can stand their own ground.
I think the best update to that CoC will be kindly asking any person from the USofA to not participate. The rest of the document may be left in any state.
Most of problems with harrasment and reactions to it would disappear overnight. The USA does not dominate the contributions anymore, but it does absolutely dwarf anybody else when it comes to shitstorms.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#208Others have pointed a seemingly silly phrase of "My rationale for these changes are documented on Twitter". But there is a deeper idea hidden there as perhaps one of the reason the changes were enacted was not protect anyone, but to increase engagement on Twitter. Whether someone is protected or not, is perhaps secondary. > (removed) "When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants should always assum…
"documented" and "twitter" in the same sentence is so weird. There no worst format for keeping an history of things. It's ephemeral, hard to browse or search, and terrible to format.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#209Almost more surprising is that this was removed: > When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants should always assume good intentions. In favor of this: > Participants should speak and act with good intentions, but understand that intent and impact are not equivalent. Also changed yesterday: > Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated. became: > Behaviour which ca…
So if a woman accused a while man of having “small hands” for having some opinion, that’s not sexual harassment because white men are not a protected class?
White men, identified by race and sex, are legally a protected class.
People with small hands are not, unless the smallness of their hands is considered a disability.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#210Gives me Mao's Cultural Revolution vibes.