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

Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 637 posts

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#321

Post by reuben364 »

goodpoint wrote: post #262
josephcsible wrote: post #173

- Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated. + Behaviour which can be considered harassment against protected classes will not be tolerated. That change sure seems a lot like it's saying "we're now okay with harassment as long as the person you're harassing isn't a member of a protected class". Isn't that then adding abuse-enabling language, not removing it?

A lot of trolls use the strategy of painting themselves as victims for being unable to harass minorities.

I've seen this in very incel-y contexts, but I can't imagine it being anywhere as pervasive in the context of GitHub. "Everybody hates me even though I'm a really nice guy, but man those class of people are ****" doesn't really have a place to show up.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#322

Post by wccrawford »

bsagdiyev wrote: post #250
bellyfullofbac wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a joke in the context of saving money that said "Must've been done by a Jew" (my supremely limited interaction - with one person from Israel - was about him trying to get more money from the organization I was representing), would it be bigoted to point that out? For my taste that "must've been a woman" line was cringeworthy. He could've said "Well I guess someone doesn't want to grow old".

I say that all the time and I’m Jewish, so I think it’s more about whether the intention was offensive or genuinely meant as a joke.

Sadly, as someone who isn't Jewish, my view is that if a non-Jewish person says that, they almost have ill intent. It's one of the things that I think people can joke about themselves that way, but it's almost impossible for an outsider to do it without ill intent.

I thought the joke that spurred this was in poor taste, but didn't have any ill intent. It definitely didn't belong on on that message. I'm not even sure jokes belong there at all. If they do, it'd be a pretty narrow selection of them, in certain circumstances.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#323

Post by tgv »

MadeThisToReply wrote: post #290
saba2008 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is part of a distasteful part of history ...of one of the english speaking countries

I think you mean "of literally every country in the entire world".

I don't like taking things literally, but in this case that would be necessary, as it's the whole point. "Master" is an English word. If it isn't, "main" is primarily translated to "haupt" in German, and we all know what a Haupttruppführer was, so that should go too, as should every other word that possibly has a negative connotation somewhere in the world.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#324

Post by jrootabega »

grumple wrote: post #282

> And while we are at it, maybe also we should correct this rule: > * Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated. To become something like (what do other posters think? Can we make it even stricter?): > * Behaviour which can be considered harassment will not be tolerated. > The law should always protect the victim, not the perpetrator. Yikes. So I'm a victim if I say I am, even if t…

That's what the rule would technically allow, but it will only be adhered to when used against the enemies of those enforcing the rules.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#325

Post by tomp »

rich_sasha wrote: post #217
koonsolo wrote: post #185

I 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 I'm realising this might be a bit of a male point of view (European here). Sometimes women put up because they feel they have to. But I agree with the general point. Banter is banter, jokes are jokes. Boundaries are boundaries. Jokes around "haha women are less smart and do the dishes" are not OK. A joke about moving your birthday because you're a woman, not so funny but wow so not sexist. "Be nice" is the lo…

Surely as long as social conventions such as “don’t ask women for their age” persist, such topics should be considered fair game for jokes?

Otherwise, we enter the field of “elective equality” - “equality where it benefits me, favoritism elsewhere”.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#326

Post by reuben364 »

mpfundstein wrote: post #252
watwut wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When we tell a sexist joke with a woman present, you will get a witty reply from them, not a call to HR. As a woman working in Europe, those sexist jokes sux. It sux to be in a team where you have to listen to it in the regular. It is tiring to have to be constantly prepared with "witty replies", just because collogues are dicks and need to pick on my gender. Yes, I tell them off or am witty depending on what I thi…

s/sux/sucks

s/^.*$/

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#327

Post by bsagdiyev »

wccrawford wrote: post #322
bsagdiyev wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say that all the time and I’m Jewish, so I think it’s more about whether the intention was offensive or genuinely meant as a joke.

Sadly, as someone who isn't Jewish, my view is that if a non-Jewish person says that, they almost have ill intent. It's one of the things that I think people can joke about themselves that way, but it's almost impossible for an outsider to do it without ill intent. I thought the joke that spurred this was in poor taste, but didn't have any ill intent. It definitely didn't belong on on that message. I'm not even sure…

Sure and I can agree with that. My point being is that not everyone sees it that way, if someone said it and meant it negatively towards me I still wouldn’t care. They want you to care and be offended, don’t give them that. Does it stop them from doing it in the future? No. Will anything stop them? Who knows. There’s a fine line on these sometimes, I don’t want to ruin the life of someone who maybe made a bad joke one time, because not everyone is bad.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#328

Post by bitwize »

undecisive wrote: post #267
simonsarris wrote: post #4

Almost 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…

One of my many misgivings about CoCs is their over-reliance on the unenforcable. This is an excellent example - because the original said exactly what needed to be said, but it wasn't being interpreted correctly. Instead of improving the wording, and saying something like "participants should always assume good intentions. However, intention does not make a person's actions immune from criticism, and while assuming g…

It has been brought into conformance with the standards of corporate HR departments, whose job it is to shield the company from discrimination lawsuits, not really to foster a kinder community.

If there are any CoCs left that do not adopt these standards, they will be brought into conformance soon. Corporate sponsorship depends on it, and open source is nothing without corporate sponsorship.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#329

Post by dotancohen »

dijit wrote: post #291
eli wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it easier to fight trolls who hide behind bad faith arguments.

"Did you intend to say that you dislike me because I'm gay?" is a pretty easy way to route out a troll. Sincere apology or not, you get to know. I've been moderating communities for 15 years, I've seen tricks from all manner of trolls and handling trolls with an even hand is still tricky; but being genuinely inquisitive is usually the easiest way to get around it. Even when tensions are high it makes people feel hear…

Direct and to the point.

Do you have any other examples?

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#330

Post by reuben364 »

DonHopkins wrote: post #269
andrew_ wrote: post #33

And another project skews into the digital manifestation of an HOA [1]. May the next generation put an end to this madness. [1] Home Owners Association, for those outside the U.S. and unfamiliar with the term.

Are you saying that the Ruby community is trying to ban Black people? Where did you get that idea? What exactly is your point? https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/homeowners-... >When homeowners associations were first created, they helped keep Black people out of the neighborhood. They're still doing it today. >Homeowners associations exploded in popularity in the 1960s as suburb development was booming…

I think he's referring to the idea of petty HOA politics where motivated power hungry people drown others out and selectively apply rules to make others miserable.
Post reply on HN