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

GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

phoronix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 387 posts

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#111

Post by woodruffw »

theepauk wrote: post #79

The only effect of a Code of Conduct I have ever personally witnessed was that people were being bullied for greeting others. The greeting they used was "hey guys", and instead of recognizing that language is fluid and different to different people they tried to impose their linguistic views on others. The people who encouraged this behavior were people on the Code of Conduct committee and at the top of the project's…

Can you provide more details?

I’ve been working on open source projects for about a decade now, including years of professional work, and I have never seen or heard someone chastised for using “guys” informally. This includes in communities with established, formal codes of conduct. It strikes me as something that most people wouldn’t even notice, unless the speaker was intentionally using it in a way that implies gender.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#112

Post by LexiMax »

dmm wrote: post #97
LexiMax wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a long queue of people lining up to criticise him, but nobody has successfully cobbled together an alternative to the FSF. This isn't true. I have actually seen several non-FSF/OSI attempts at licenses in the recent past, most notably License Zero with its Prosperity and Parity licenses, as well as alternative licenses like the Server Side Public License and Business Source License. The trouble is that att…

> The trouble is that attempting to learn from the lessons of past licenses tends to draw a lot of dogmatic outrage because said licenses either don't conform to the open source definition or four freedoms - or at least, not in the opinion of the OSI or FSF. They generate outrage because they are accompanied by people trying to change the definition of open-source, not with the idea of alternative licenses.

> They generate outrage because they are accompanied by people trying to change the definition of open-source

If the precondition of learning lessons from past licenses is that they must follow the rules set by those past licenses as holy writ, then it follows that organizations like the FSF with leaders like RMS are the best you can hope for.

Personally, I think we as a community of developers are capable of better.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#113

Post by aleph_minus_one »

phpisthebest wrote: post #72
speeder wrote: post #35

I see a lot of people here forgetting a real case of CoC abuse. There was this famous Drupal dev that wrote a transcript of a fetish wedding on his fetish social media profile. An enemy of his on Drupal quoted that transcript and used it as examples the Dev should be punished. Drupal, like GCC proposed rules, allow punishment of someone for something they did outside the community, and not only the guy was punished,…

In most instances it is not the rules that are the problem, it is the people enforcing the rules that is the problem Power Corrupts, and any time you give a group of humans power over another group of humans they will abuse that power. EVERY TIME. No human can resist, and it an immutable law of psychology. Power Corrupts and will be abused. CoC's formalize this power, and result of which is inevitable

> In most instances it is not the rules that are the problem, it is the people enforcing the rules that is the problem

You need two things for this kind of problem to occur:

1. people who abuse power

2. rules that allow this abuse (in this case the CoC)

You cannot change humans, but you can lobby to prevent 2 from happening (in this case lobby against a CoC to become adopted).

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#114

Post by giraffe_lady »

GunnarSturla wrote: post #110
giraffe_lady wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll buy this when I hear a straight man talk about the guys he's dated. A thing that I have still never once observed.

I don't think this example counters the gender neutrality of "guys". Have you ever observed a straight man talk about the people he's dated?

Yes.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#115

Post by Supermancho »

Dalewyn wrote: post #46
foldr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely commonplace. Yes, you can be fired for doing something outside of work that would bring your employer into disrepute. If anything this used to be much more common before the era of codes of conduct, when people were, for example, routinely fired when it was discovered that they were gay.

[flagged]

> What part of having absolutely nothing to do with the company or its business do you not understand?

Maybe don't respond to someone who ignores core elements of the statements they are ostensibly replying to? If your posts are coherent and compelling, a respondent moving the goalpost or changing the conversation is obvious.

If you are being charitable, quoting a historical summary of the back-and-forth to clarify your own understanding and where it went wrong, would be helpful. Otherwise, this game of "nuh-uh" is not constructive.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#116

Post by knjnppp »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #106
bragr wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a part of the US where "guys" is used as a gender neutral collective noun. My mom and grandma would call out "guys, dinner is ready!" to the whole family to call us to the table for example. So it's definitely whiplash inducing for the same group of people preaching inclusion and tolerance, and how we need to accept regional and racial dialects in the workplace, to then turn around and implement slackbots th…

I'll buy this when I hear a straight man talk about the guys he's dated. A thing that I have still never once observed.

Glad it's not up to you to "buy" the words I choose!

My region uses "you guys" for the you plural in English, too, and you petty speech totalitarians didn't show up until I was grown so even though I now live in a region that says y'all and even prefer it, when speaking I form sentences in my native language too quickly to catch myself every time I use my native term for you plural

But you and your language policing petty authoritarians would have me sent to the gulag for your ridiculous overly academic context ignoring willful and politically motivated misinterpretation of my diction

Screw you!

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#117

Post by josephcsible »

phpisthebest wrote: post #78
JonChesterfield wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair warning, I do not like codes of conduct. They're an authoritarian power play justified by fear. Codes of conduct are more about changing who is in the community than about changing the conduct of existing community members. Periodically someone runs afoul of the ruling elite who pass judgement upon them behind closed doors, usually leading to excommunication. The atmosphere of knowing what you say will be report…

>>It seems to be "excluding unpopular people and ideas", careful there you will get some very bad takes, and memes on Popper's paradox of tolerance, which has been completely bastardized to justify all manner of intolerance these days...

[flagged]

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#118

Post by XorNot »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #22
lionkor wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lead the moderation team for BeamMP (beammp.com, 150k+ User Discord) for a few months, and been part of it for much longer, and the two most positive changes I've seen are: - Regular meetings to keep everyone on-track (as nobody is being paid, its a passion project, etc) - Setting up clear rules and moderation guidelines, together. The team sat together and came up with a list of do's and don't's, best practices…

Do you just moderate stuff that happens on the discord, or do you ban people if they do some "wrong" stuff outside of discord? Because the CoC draft allows excluding people for doing "wrong" stuff even outside of GCC (-trackers, -mailing lists, etc.). There's a difference for baning people in places where they should behave professionally, and banning people for stuff they do outside of those places.

The reason that clause is there is to deal with dedicated harassers who will try to skirt the rules while still attacking their victims.

For example: is hurling abuse at another member about their sexuality in a bar not connected to a conference, "a space under GCC control"?

Technically: no. But those people are only proximal due to participation in the project.

But maybe they don't do it to members. Maybe it's just their hobby - attend GCC conferences and hurl abuse at people in the nearby gay bars each night, then show up the next day in the T-shirt and conference badge, forcing the reception staff they were yelling at the previous night to interact with them.

Again: technically, not connected to GCC. After all - they could fly to any city they want at any time and do this. They're not doing it in "spaces under GCC control". But they're doing it right next to them. And any member of the public making casual observations would start to see the pattern of this happening whenever a GCC conference is in town.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#119

Post by dingnuts »

woodruffw wrote: post #108
nkuttler wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a shocking concept: language has context.

The person you’re responding to is providing an example of context-sensitivity.

The person he's responding to is choosing to be obtuse in order to police other peoples' language based on rules derived by their political ideology, and does not care about context

I wish you guys could understand that

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#120

Post by TimedToasts »

commitpizza wrote: post #30

I can't wait until the silent majority stops being silent and throws out CoC and their people from projects. It is seriously a toxic thing that creates debates over stuff where there is no need for it to be a debate to begin with.

Still too dangerous to speak out. I wouldn't advise anyone to do so if they are currently employed or would like to be employed in the future.
Post reply on HN