311–320 of 387 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain what the abbreviations are for those of us out of the loop?
Diversity Inclusion Equity Belonging they're not meaningful
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…
I think this line of thought deserves some exploration.
If the burden of proof truly was negligible, CoCs would probably be weaponized more often. My impression is more that the burden of proof is reduced selectively, in favor of people who are good at a certain type of politics / playing social games.
So CoCs can be perceived as a shift of power away from technical merit and towards social skills. No wonder there's a backlash from a lot of technical folks. It's also objectively questionable whether such a shift of power is useful for projects.
(Humans are always gonna politic, even if it's only nerds, but the normative shift of whether politicking is officially condoned or even valued is what matters)
I don't think it's a surprise that we're seeing CoCs in this age of commercialized open source. In the 90s and 00s, open source projects could only survive by technical merit. Nowadays, corporate sponsorship is a very important factor in project viability, and with corporations comes the bigger focus on politics.
Possibly a big mistake to make this post, but I've written my own code of conduct template, which I use on my projects (mostly since snyk, github and similar scanners rank you down if you don't have it). https://github.com/ltworf/international_code_of_conduct/blob...
That's both ambitious and a little daring. One place where I disagree is in the "skill discrimination" section. If you look up the definition of the word "discrimination", you'd see that it probably means something different (in common use) than what you intend. I'd be fine with agreeing that volunteers are not obligated to put energy in to low quality / low energy contributions, but saying explanations aren't requir…
I've tried to explain kindly why I reject and what to change… but results were poor. The code of conduct doesn't forbid to try, it just doesn't punish giving up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> BDSM doesn't "make women slaves". This specific BDSM-fetish did. That was part of the kink and the ideology behind it.
Do you have documentation of that? Can you prove that it was non-consensual? Was there a prosecution of human trafficking that followed on? I ask because I'm not surprised at all that there's slavery among BDSM aficionados, but it is supposed to be consensual, and Larry himself asserts that every slave relationship is consensual in the communities he belonged to, as of 2017: https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outi…
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…
> the burden of proof for triggering evisceration by committee is usually negligible I think this line of thought deserves some exploration. If the burden of proof truly was negligible, CoCs would probably be weaponized more often. My impression is more that the burden of proof is reduced selectively , in favor of people who are good at a certain type of politics / playing social games. So CoCs can be perceived as a…
Towards social merit. If you can't/won't convince the new "powers that be" that you are sufficiently aligned with their dogma, then goodbye.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The irony here is that you're using the same kind of logic (the project can't survive if it's closed to transphobes!) that's mocked in the following comment when the shoe is on the other foot (LOL the project can't survive without trans people): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36430649 This does highlight the point that diversity is to some extent a zero sum game. You can welcome trans people to your project, or…
You can welcome trans people to your project, or transphobes, but not necessarily both. You don't need to "welcome" either. You just don't talk about that stuff because it has zero relevance to your project, unless you're trying to use it as a political statement (which technical projects shouldn't be at all.)
Unless it is somehow very relevant to the project, I just don't want to know about anybody's race, gender, genitals, or politics. All those things can be weaponized to become divisive. I just want to work together with other people who are passionate about great technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does your organization have a code of conduct itself?
Mine does not, but then around here we have anti-bullying, anti-harassment and anti-discrimination laws so these things are penal matters, not merely contract breaches.