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

151–160 of 387 posts

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#151

Post by BasedAnon »

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.

Why would they use it to refer to a group of exclusively women? 'guys' refers to a group of men or a group of men and women, not to a group of women. Is that so hard to understand?

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#152

Post by Cthulhu_ »

klipt wrote: post #59
kramerger wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically you want to go to a technical forum with a significant number of Irish members and tell them that in your opinion Irish people should not exist? Don't you see how that makes the place unwelcoming to them?? (Replace Irish with gay, trans, republican, ...)

There are always scissor cases. Suppose X, a Ukrainian says on Twitter "I wish the Russians would get out of Ukraine" and then Y, a Ukrainian of Russian ethnicity reports X for saying that Y shouldn't exist. Who is right in this case, X or Y? Replace Russia/Ukraine with your favorite contentious issue and you could potentially see communities splitting up over this.

There's no right or wrong in this case though. The statement is a wish, it's not punching down on Russians. And the report is invalid, because X did not in fact say what Y claims that they said.

It's not the issue itself, it's the intent. If the intent is exclusionary - if X did say Y should not exist - then there's negative, unwelcoming intent.

It's not actually as complicated as the anti-CoC crowd is trying to make it look. All CoC's should / could be summarized as "be nice", with the caveat that if you're not, you won't be treated nicely either. And even that's not the case, because nine times out of ten, you will be asked to change your behaviour and patiently explained why it's bad.

And most adults can accept that. They can accept that saying "X should not exist" is bad.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#153

Post by dingnuts »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #136
VancouverMan wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Code states, "Harassment and other exclusionary behavior aren't acceptable." > > Yet, targeting specific individuals with exclusion seems to be the main method of enforcement. That's not the gotcha you think it is; enforcers get higher privileges to enforce. Cops have the authority to carry a gun and kill people; the army has the authority to carry and use guns that civilians don't. "Take some time off" is a mo…

No, "take time off" is just more condescending. It's fake care, concern trolling, punishment couched in the overly clinical language of millennials who are afraid to upset people because of mental health reasons

I would literally rather be banned with language telling me I was banned, because that's honest at least. If you're kicking me out of a community because you don't like me, at least have the decency not to pretend to my face like you are trying to do me a favor.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#154

Post by josephcsible »

Dalewyn wrote: post #31
074edc15 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sold on the idea that "violations of this code outside these spaces" is a bad thing, it depends what those violations are. I'm completely happy and have spent my career working with people who's views don't always align with my own. If I have a religious co-worker who believes I will spend eternity burning in hell for my sexuality, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. They have a right to their view, I have…

>I'm not sold on the idea that "violations of this code outside these spaces" is a bad thing, Let's frame it in a more relatable context. Your employer can fire you for violating the company code of conduct, despite your behaviour having absolutely nothing to do with the company or its business.

> Your employer can fire you for violating the company code of conduct, despite your behaviour having absolutely nothing to do with the company or its business.

In particular, if you're in favor of both this CoC and of labor unions, then your beliefs are inconsistent, since one of the things labor unions do is try to prevent their members from being fired without legitimate, work-related reasons.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#155

Post by nkuttler »

woodruffw wrote: post #111
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 g…

I'm not sure what kind of details you're looking for?

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#156

Post by logicprog »

redeeman wrote: post #109
practice9 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drupal, like GCC proposed rules, allow punishment of someone for something they did outside the community, and not only the guy was punished, an ex girlfriend of his was harassed by "helpful" people Oh wow. I was undecided about the helpfulness of CoC as sometimes people in the project can become hostile, unstable or passive-aggressive. But this case is very bad. Seems like CoC opens up ways for character assassina…

i would also recommend you research who came up with and popularized the CoC that everyone uses, and what comments this person had about what would happen when popular projects adopt it. I wont tell you, as I dont want to be accused of putting words in anyones mouth, this will probably be downvoted, but go look it up yourself if you care. In general i'd say, it doesnt matter who brings information, only what the info…

After a brief Google search, I think you're referring to Coraline Ada Ehmke, but I can't find anything problematic about her, what she's said, or her goals — unless you're referring to the fact that she's transgender and cares about social justice. Is that why you're being deliberately vague? Would you mind elaborating instead of vagueposting? What are your specific concerns? What is "extremely objectively poor" about the standard CoC?

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#157

Post by Cthulhu_ »

kramerger wrote: post #3
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.

From the comments section: "If you have a CoC, then you have formal rules around moderation with the option to appeal" Basically, when someone does something stupid (and let's be realistic, it will happen) then there are clear rules and processes to follow.

And that's fine, pretty much every online community has some of those.

It seems a lot of people have a problem with the wording, or the implication that their behaviour may be bad and get them removed.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#158

Post by beej71 »

Akronymus wrote: post #47
074edc15 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sold on the idea that "violations of this code outside these spaces" is a bad thing, it depends what those violations are. I'm completely happy and have spent my career working with people who's views don't always align with my own. If I have a religious co-worker who believes I will spend eternity burning in hell for my sexuality, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. They have a right to their view, I have…

>..., it depends what those violations are. It decidedly does not. To quote Kovarex, a Factorio dev: “If Stalin had a good writeup on programming, would linking that be dangerous?” [1] I believe VERY strongly in separating the art from the artist. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/o2ly6f/friday_fac...

Yes, it would definitely be dangerous, but not in the way Kovarex is thinking of. There's a reason you wouldn't be able to find a link to it on any corporate webpage, right?

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#159

Post by that_guy_iain »

bragr wrote: post #92
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…

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…

When non-native English speakers are taught English, they are taught that "Hey guys" is gender neutral. So you'll meet lots of non-native English speakers who will be completely shocked at that it's not.

I have so much fun joking with some of my women friends that they're sexist because they're using "guys" instead of "folks".

To me, it's one of those things where someone is always going to be awkward and say "that doesn't include me". They may jokingly say something but some take it as a personal insult and just assume the other person is being sexist. While I always use "folks" just to avoid the hassle, personally I wouldn't be too bothered if the people who take "Hey guys" as a sexist insult don't talk to me.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#160

Post by kalkin »

mistercheph wrote: post #128
kalkin wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which people? The imaginary people who are offended by "deadlock"?

[flagged]

I can't tell if you're joking or trying to prove a point (after all this is a comment section that's worked itself into a froth about the Orwellian behavior of imaginary people) but I notice that you haven't made this request of anyone else, so I'm pretty sure it's not sincere.
Post reply on HN