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

581–590 of 637 posts

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

#581

Post by noxer »

raxxorrax wrote: post #383
noxer wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment was exactly in that ironic spirit. The internet version or a slow clap for someone who did something completely useless for the sole purpose of virtual signaling. If someone runs around on github doing such nonsense "work" editing text no one ever reads you dont deserve more than a ironic acknowledgement. Its like writing ToS that no one reads but replace the salary of a lawyer with people laughing at you…

I don't think you should ever demonize trivial contributions. I really dislike any COC or even the intent to further "professionalism" but that is another matter. You will never lose anything if someone contributes, however small the change may be. I have a project with an extremely narrow purpose. Someone corrected a missing dot in a sentence. That was awesome and unexpected.

Fixing a missing dot has infinitely more real value than changing something that has no use at all to something different that still has no use. Nothing wrong with trivial contribution but these are contribution that just waste peoples time so a small group of people can get a dopamine reward out of it.

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

#582

Post by harpersealtako »

okeuro49 wrote: post #386

I raised my eyebrow at a statement in one of the comments in the PR. "This is so that a harasser won't be able to use a meritocracy argument, which as we all know, is dehumanizing..." I don't follow this at all. A meritocracy is what we want to achieve: it doesn't matter about the colour of your skin, sex, or orientation, if you can generate code of merit, then if there is a meritocracy, you should earn the respect o…

read the rest of that user's (@hmdne)'s comments.

https://github.com/ruby/www.ruby-lang.org/pull/2690

>We all know who are protected classes. For instance, members of board of directors of the big corporations are a protected class.

I think we all got played.

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

#583

Post by _lazlo »

dym_sh wrote: post #319
brabel wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which countries do you think have no slavery in their history?

those re/formed within last 100 years. (and those who actively deny its existence /s)

I find this offensive

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

#585

Post by papa-whisky »

scandox wrote: post #425

The change indicated in the title[1] was made on foot of trolling by the user @hmdne It's really a remarkable failure of communication. It doesn't appear anyone read what he was saying carefully. They just looked at the first two lines of his proposal and assumed they understood his intent. And then when encouraged he actually made the change. And they actually merged it. It's amazing that people who are apparently p…

This user has now opened another PR[1], owning up to their trolling and suggesting that the CoC changes should be reverted.

This whole thing is pretty juvenile but I must admit I found it amusing.

[1]https://github.com/ruby/www.ruby-lang.org/pull/2696

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

#586

Post by Lammy »

temp8964 wrote: post #2

This whole CoC thing is just stupid. Why do they need to write this kind of rules in the first place?

Excuse me but "st*pid" is an ableist slur whose use harms and triggers disabled people, which makes it a source of mass psychological harm for an already marginalized group.

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

#587

Post by jeegsy »

Locke wrote: post #406

I 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…

The easiest, safest prediction to make is that all this is not going to end well. The only question is when the shoe drops, what form will it take?

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

#588

Post by tomohawk »

Dysfunctional organizations try to solve things by creating a new rule every time something happens that some incomptent with enough power to make a rule doesn't like. You just end up with a pile of suffocating policy haphazardly put together by the most neurotic.

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

#589

Post by placer »

meowface wrote: post #544
placer wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an aside, I do not trust Rational Wiki to be a reliable source of information. Just one example: Their information about Alcoholics Anonymous’s effectiveness can charitably be described as a dumpster fire: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous (For example, they cite Brandsma 1980, which is a very outdated chestnut anti-AA polemics always bring out; the study is really old and its methodology was pret…

Rational Wiki is one of the most unintentionally funny and ridiculous sites, given the name. It's probably one of the least reliable and credible sources of information on the internet due to the juxtaposition, a la DPRK's name. It's Pathos Wiki. [Something something Conservapedia, stare into abyss, etc.] For some reason, it seems there are basically no nominally-neutral websites, forums, or news outlets that exist.…

Indeed. The one thing RationalWiki is good at is, when there’s some quack theory or junk science out there that’s not notable enough to grace the Wikipedia, RW often times has a page on it.

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

#590

Post by mannykannot »

Rd6n6 wrote: post #502
mannykannot wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Do you really not see that either extreme is more exploitable and less resilient than a more pragmatic middle ground? Personally, my guess is that the optimum is usually towards assuming the best, but that it shifts depending on the level of antagonism present.
Post reply on HN