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

141–150 of 387 posts

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#141

Post by woodruffw »

dingnuts wrote: post #119
woodruffw wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

"Context for me but not for thee" is not a principled argument.

The rest of the comment is speculative: you don't know anything about their politics, or have any reason to believe they're being obtuse.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#143

Post by rgoulter »

LexiMax wrote: post #37
mbStavola wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know the silent majority aren't in favor of CoCs?

They don’t. I have been away from hacker news for about 2 to 3 years and quite frankly I am shocked that this place is still having this same tired argument whereas outside it seems to be an accepted fact of life that having rules surrounding the conduct of project participants is in fact a good thing.

> outside it seems to be an accepted fact of life that having rules surrounding the conduct of project participants is in fact a good thing.

I think this talks past concerns.

"Just kick out the rude people" is probably a good thing. "Just kick out the people the admins don't like" is probably a bad thing (or at least isn't as impartial as the former).

With sections like "In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may affect a person's ability to participate within them" it really seems the intention of the rules goes above/beyond "rules for the space where project participants communicate in".

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#144

Post by malwrar »

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.

I haven’t used “guys” in that specific way, but I’ve definitely called my various female partners “dude” before. Language is fluid etc.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#147

Post by CJefferson »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #6
not_your_vase wrote: post #2

Has there been any project which had its community change its conduct after adopting a CoC? Or any projects which had a profound impact due a CoC? I see that having CoC is getting standard with OSS projects, old and new alike. But have no idea if it actually does anything.

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…

The ruling elites of open source projects were banning people from IRC in the 90s, this didn’t require CoCs to be introduced.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#148

Post by dingnuts »

VancouverMan wrote: post #100
Akronymus wrote: post #32

Overall it seems like a pretty decent CoC. Altough, I am REALLY not a fan of this line: "In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may affect a person's ability to participate within them." I fear that that stipulation will be used to try and kick out people for holding "bad" opinions outside of the project. Like what was tried with Elia Schito.

Enforcement of this code of conduct would seem to inherently put the enforcers in violation of the Code. The Code states, " Harassment and other exclusionary behavior aren't acceptable. " Yet, targeting specific individuals with exclusion seems to be the main method of enforcement. As you indicated, the linked-to page recommends exclusion be used: " In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may affect…

The people who write these codes and enforce them are cops. Cops aren't against violence, they're against other people using violence.

CoCs aren't about stopping harassment and exclusion, they're about establishing a monopoly on harassment and exclusion.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#149

Post by woodruffw »

LanceH wrote: post #130
woodruffw wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 g…

A CoC might be just fine. GCC's looks nice -- basically "act professionally". But , there are people out there who jump at the opportunity to take offense on someone else's behalf. The female analog to "guys" seems to be "gals", but nobody uses that anymore, preferring "girls". The word "girls" is a word of automatic offense taking to some, even if everyone involved in the conversation is cool with it. I've seen the…

Again: details would be nice. People do indeed take offense on others' behalves (and probably should do so less often), but that's more of a human nature thing; it's not evidence that CoCs actually make that phenomenon worse.

> Then add in the desire to drop life changing punishments to such mild things. Say the wrong thing and get fired. See Python and the stupid dongle joke. That didn't need a video, that needed a brief reprimand of, "grow up" and it could have been done. Instead it got an interrogation and people fired -- and more CoC's for everything.

To be clear: this had nothing to do with a CoC; I don't think PyCon even had one at the time. Given that both people ended up being fired it's unclear that a CoC could have even possibly produced worse individual outcomes for either, given that the power implied by one is normally limited to an online community or physical conference center.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#150

Post by VancouverMan »

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.

A nuance of that usage of "guys" to refer to a group consisting of both men and women is that the group of people being referred to is typically immediately present in some way.

Like in those earlier examples, the people are probably all within the same house/yard at the same time when they're called to dinner, or they're all using the same online discussion forum at about the same time.

When discussing multiple individuals with significant time and/or distance separating them (like the people somebody has dated over the span of years), a more specific term like "men", "women", "men and women", or "people" would likely be used instead.

Post reply on HN