Most of these kids wouldn't know real tolerance if it slapped them in the face, anyway
Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
451–460 of 637 posts
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#452Please tell me that this Code of Conducts are all jokes? I've developed a fragile and basic rule which I try to follow: Don't be an asshole. I fail sometimes following that rule and I don't deny it. I struggle to become better but keep going. Of course you could extend this by "Help others, when appropriate", "Be nice to each other", "Use common sense", "Pardon others", "Don't be a d***", "Don't be a b*****" but that…
> Don't be an asshole. A whole lot of the reasonable parts of "woke" boil down to a few things: (1) Don't be an asshole. (2) Don't meddle in the affairs of others if those affairs do not concern you. (3) Evaluate other people from first principles and starting with a positive assumption, and check yourself for subconscious biases against groups of people that you might have picked up without really thinking about the…
Wokism is precisely about being an asshole, and using the language of social justice justify bullying and intimidating people. I think we're a little late to the game recognizing this because historically authoritarian and bullying behavior has been more likely to come from the right than from the left.
I generally avoid projects with a CoC because it signifies that the people in charge are more interested in picking fights than they are in developing great software.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#453One user here is obviously trolling and the other is oblivious... Will these changes stick? Who knows...
Also, the person who made the joke about women's ages should be banned for such a lame, cliche joke.
As for harassment as CoCs, it's a mailing list... How hard is it to just talk about code?
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#454The conversation in the PR makes me feel like its author thinks the whole world is California and every single computer user knows what Californian laws are. What a chauvinistic little bigot he must be.
ignorance is a bless for some people.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems a little ironic to use unprofessional language in this situation. It's not ironic. Forceful language (and rather tame still) is not just as bad as a 'joke'. The offence was not at the unprofessionalism of the joke, but at the contents of the joke. That is what fuelled a discussion. Removing the line from the CoC also was not a response to the joke. It was a response to the ensuing discussion about the joke. T…
> Removing the line from the CoC also was not a response to the joke. It was a response to the ensuing discussion about the joke. > Talking about proportionality as if the change was brought because of the joke is as questioning the proportionality of WW I to the death of archduke Franz Ferdinand. I first thought your response was a joke, but maybe you actually mean that, put some emojis next time to show if you are…
What evidence is there that this person is joking? Woke scolds have no sense of humor. That's why this discussion thread exists in the first place.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was there and in most places people were way nicer than now.
But banter, irony and jokes were more accepted and not policed and politicized.
banter, irony and jokes are still accepted in all communities I'm know of, and I'm active in various popular FLOSS projects. I've never heard of a CoC prohibiting such things.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had similar experience. Went to an art installation run by group of young lefties, and upon entering they say: “if you see any racism or sexism, you should come to us and report it”. I was taken aback and immediately felt uncomfortable. Why did they need to say this? Do they have a problem with racism and sexism? Which would have been unusual because it was a lefty place. The real question is does any of this stuff…
> Do they have a problem with racism and sexism? Which would have been unusual because it was a lefty place. Очень хорошо, товарищ
> Очень хорошо, товарищ
Прекрати писать на русском языке
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah - no longer assuming good intentions is a weird thing to change. I guess it makes it easier to claim bad intentions?
It covers the case when someone makes an inappropriate joke then defends themselves saying it was just a joke. The person being inappropriate will always hide behind their intent because they can only argue about their own role in the exchange (e.g. they can't argue that the target person/group isn't really hurt). When a conversation is derailed away from the damage caused to the intent, the harasser wins. What are y…
> It covers the case when someone makes an inappropriate joke then defends themselves saying it was just a joke.
Tell them to not make these jokes here and flag their account, repeat a handful of times and kick them out if it persists despite warnings. No need to interpret intent, no ability to hide behind ignorance after several warnings.
> Always have good defaults :)
It is impossible to harass people if you just ban every new account under the assumption of guilt.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I've seen the same pattern emerging on instant messaging and forums of various FOSS projects.
The rain of downvotes on my and your comments are very telling, sadly.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#460Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's definitely a difficult balance to strike, to provide guardrails for diverse groups of individuals, that ensure everyone can behave and be treated civilly. I applaud you for your ability to stand up for yourself in moments of discomfort or where you feel others are being mistreated. Unfortunately, not everyone is as confident or as self-advocating as you, and a CoC can help protect those who are more likely to we…
And all the virtue signalling apparently leads to people like me, who are adults and can very well stand for themselves, not attending such conferences anymore. I truely think that people who are not willing or able to defend themselves in a social setting have bigger problems then FLOSS conferences. They have skipped a part of growing up. I feel sorry for them. But I dont agree that we should plaster everything with…
I am really sorry to hear you had such a negative experience at your recent conference. Small children can definitely be a disruption under any circumstances and I cannot imagine how difficult it would be to adequately hear a presenter with boisterous children nearby.
As to your first comment, I would urge you to extend some compassion to individuals who do not or cannot stand up for themselves. An individual who has been the victim of trauma or abuse is not inherently 'mentally weak' and did not necessarily 'skip a part of growing up'.
Consider for example:
In the late 90s and early 2000s it was a common part of the gamer vernacular to use the term 'rape' in a way that was synonymous with 'pwning', '0wning', or otherwise overwhelmingly beating someone in a game. This terminology was incredibly insensitive (and psychologically damaging) to gamers who were victims of sexual assault, and many venues and gaming communities had to introduce rules to forbid its usage (alongside other epithets and hurtful language).
These rules were not intended to give victims of abuse a 'false sense of security' they were intended to raise awareness within these communities for what was considered acceptable behavior, and to educate individuals who (despite acting without malice) did not consider the potential harm they might be causing others.
Likewise, someone who is part of a marginalized group, or someone who a Code of Conduct is intending to protect, should not need to independently apply social pressure to every individual who cannot conduct themselves with civility. That is an unfair burden of expectation to place on the shoulders of few, when the responsibility belongs to us all.
While I would love to live in a world where people can behave with empathy and compassion for others, the undeniable reality is that bad faith actors will always need some explicit rules. Otherwise, they will merely hide behind the façade of "No one said I couldn't do x, it's not against the rules!'.
And yes, I believe it is 'ok if the mentally weak feel welcome', I do not believe you should need to be an emotionally impervious hero to wish to attend a social or professional gathering.