With all the ageism on the job market going on it's gonna be men who are lying about their age even more than women...
Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
501–510 of 637 posts
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#502Earlier 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?
Having a position of always assuming good intentions can be gamed by people with bad intentions.
Do you really not see that the opposite is also true? Having a position where good intentions are not assumed can be gamed far more easily by people with bad intentions
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#503I wish we responded to situations more proportionally. In this case, someone made a joke about women not liking to reveal their true age as they get older. It's a boring cliched joke. Something I've heard too many times in my life (and, most often from women). Is it sexist? I can see the argument. Is it professional to make such a joke on a ruby mailing list? I don't know, perhaps not. Does it warrant responses like…
> No links to the joke. It's quoted in the GitHub link, and presumably it'd be trivial to find in the list archives. This isn't as benign as you characterize it, since it's basically "this date handling bug must have been created by a woman since women lie about their age". Lazy misogyny is still misogyny. > Is it professional to make such a joke on a ruby mailing list? I understand what you're doing here ( https://r…
The way you wrote made me go check the joke... and found out actually I disagree with you.
The joke was that the bug could be caused because it was written FOR a woman, not BY a woman.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#504I wish we responded to situations more proportionally. In this case, someone made a joke about women not liking to reveal their true age as they get older. It's a boring cliched joke. Something I've heard too many times in my life (and, most often from women). Is it sexist? I can see the argument. Is it professional to make such a joke on a ruby mailing list? I don't know, perhaps not. Does it warrant responses like…
It's the cruel moraliser[0].
[0]: https://aeon.co/essays/how-the-cruel-moraliser-uses-a-halo-t...
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#505Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
This is largely true, but there remains the issue that there are some people who, for whatever reason, almost seem to go out of their way to assume bad intent and interpret what was said or written in the worst possible way. There is probably some sad history behind many of those individuals, but reasonable people can disagree about how to deal with the situation. The current fashion implies that as soon as one such…
Perhaps we can pair serial 'it was just a joke' with serial 'that's offensive' people in an infinite outrage loop and then go on with our lives?
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#506Please 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…
>I've developed a fragile and basic rule which I try to follow: Don't be an asshole. Give yourself some credit. There's a lot of precedence for this rule. One of the original versions of it goes something like: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you..."
[deleted]
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#507Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#508Earlier 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…
I wish it was that easy. Very often trolls feed on attention and love the sealioning.
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are asking all the right questions... And you will never get an acceptable answer beyond "Some times you need to break a few eggs to make an omelette." Sadly, the CoC wars were lost several years ago. The victors had the simplest tactic: projection. "We are just against all the bad things. We are anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-prejudice. Why aren't you on our side?" Well, I have two things to say. First, I eagerl…
"Do you agree with me or are you racist?"
Exactly, and the "nice" approach is talking to people gently about why what they said is "harmful" or bad. But you still have to come to the same agreement or you're bad. It's not actually tolerance its "we'll give you a pass if you come to our side".
Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC
#510Please 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…
> I fail sometimes following that rule and I don't deny it. We all have different definitions of being a jerk. So, do you take responsibility when you’ve crossed your own line, or when you’ve crossed someone else’s line?
Very good question! Has the other person's line been communicated or are we left to assume what they consider appropriate?