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

341–350 of 387 posts

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#341

Post by sensanaty »

userbinator wrote: post #310
sensanaty wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but from what I remember they would seek out every possible opportunity in every single possible open source community they could find and propose the CoC that they wrote. 0 contributions to the projects, with the exception of demanding that people implement incredibly verbose CoC's in their projects under the guise of "protecting the minorities contributing to the projects". Most infamous instance is pro…

That is an extreme case, but some people are just naturally attention-seeking trolls. The right thing to do is to ignore them.

That's the thing though, it's hard to ignore them since they pose themselves as coming from a morally righteous place, and they have the followers to back them up with their demands. Just look at the Opal thread I posted, it's started as a demand, and then a bunch of people who've had 0 to do with Opal start spamming the thread to back up the OP and hurling insults around at all the contributors for "daring" to associate themselves with one of the most prolific contributors to the project.

All of their arguments are also posed in a way to make anyone who disagrees seem like they're disagreeing with something very reasonable. It's phrased in such a way as to imply that they're in the 100% right, and if you dare disagree you're a bigot/homophone/transphobe/whatever other bad thing that can stick.

Every time I've seen a project get targeted by these CoCs, all the maintainers approach it from a good place assuming no malice, whereas the ones pushing for it will NOT take no for an answer.

I mean just look at one of the final comments in that locked Opal issue: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941#issuecomment-1132902...

They're blatantly trying to paint anyone disagreeing with them, no matter how mild the disagreement, as someone attacking them directly, and there's a scary amount of people who would side with them as well.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#342

Post by redeeman »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #331
redeeman wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well guess what, as everyone likes to say, "we live in a democracy", part of the rules is respecting that other people have other opinions. If you work within the system in a legal and peaceful manner, then that is fair game, and what these people are trying to do is discriminate against others, that which they claim to oppose so wholeheartedly. It truly exposes them for what they are

> part of the rules is respecting that other people have other opinions. not at all. We can acknowledge that other people have opinions ( "respecting" a fact makes no sense in english) but we don't have to respect either the people or the opinions, depending on who they are or what they are: such respect can be earned and lost on merit > If you work within the system in a legal and peaceful manner, then that is fair…

> working within the system means complying with the CoC and any other terms & prerequisites to contributing

and if there is no CoC? is it then respecting the system to throw a tantrum if they wont adapt one?

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#343

Post by dgfitz »

redeeman wrote: post #323
logicprog wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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" abou…

i couldnt possibly care that anyone is transgender or not, but i find the contributor covenant to be a ridiculous document, that feels the need to point out a whole slew of shit that you cant discriminate against. How about just say "cant discriminate" ? or perhaps "cant discriminate against anything non-technical" ? why do I need to read a long list of peoples ailments and problems in life? why does it have to be so…

It doesn’t.

At some point this pendulum has to swing back.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#344

Post by DangitBobby »

woodruffw wrote: post #268
throwitawayplz wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dbt slack community has a bot that says > Hi! Reminder: “guys” is an inherently gendered term. Great alternatives include “everyone”, “folks”, “team”, "friends" or “y’all”. Thank you for helping us build a more inclusive community! The only thing that really bothers me personally about this is the mistaken idea that language can be "inherently" anything. The meaning of a term varies based on usage, it is not inhe…

You're entitled to an opinion about it, but a Slack bot that pings you when you say "guys" is not remotely comparable to bullying (which is the top-level claim in this thread).

I would consider it a form of harassment and such petty language policies would certainly impact my desire to participate in a community. I would feel unwelcome.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#345

Post by mablopoule »

sensanaty wrote: post #341
userbinator wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an extreme case, but some people are just naturally attention-seeking trolls. The right thing to do is to ignore them.

That's the thing though, it's hard to ignore them since they pose themselves as coming from a morally righteous place, and they have the followers to back them up with their demands. Just look at the Opal thread I posted, it's started as a demand, and then a bunch of people who've had 0 to do with Opal start spamming the thread to back up the OP and hurling insults around at all the contributors for "daring" to assoc…

Exactly.

I think the best way to avoid falling into that kind of trap is to learn to dissociate between a value one believe in, and a discourse/action done in the name of that value.

It's perfectly possible to agree to one without agreeing to the other.

People who haven't yet learned this[1] tend to think that disagreeing with the latter also means disagreeing with the former. Worse, they might believe that not personally sharing/believing a value constitutes an attack on this value. And since one's identity tends to be tied with one's deeply held values, it constitue an attack on them or on their peers as well.

The important point is that good people might do it in good faith, out of naivety. In the Opal thread, however, I believe most of the 'Twitter army' that came to +1 the CoC uses it as a rethorical trick, out of self-righteousness.

[1] And I honestly believe that most early twenty-something tends to fall into that category, especially the most politicaly or religiously active ones.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#346

Post by DangitBobby »

arp242 wrote: post #238
LtWorf wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you speak up you're a pedo… I wrote on a debian mailing list a while ago, when they wanted to sign against rms. I didn't address all the accuses against him, just the one about being ableist, and how as a disabled person I don't think non-disabled people should decide just to push their agenda. Anyway, I got some thanks in private, for speaking up, but nobody publicly replied. the mail in question, if you care…

Also, Stallman is clearly a neurodivergent individual, so shouldn't we at least try to be accepting and inclusive of that, too (within limits, of course) instead of jumping on every awkwardly worded remark and interpreting that in the most negative possible way? "Assume good faith" etc. I wrote a "Stallman is not a good leader, but he's not a transphobic ableist monster" article and I got more feedback over email and…

Most people do not assume good faith, especially online. Depending on the person, they will often go directly for the least charitable interpretation possible. The goal isn't to be humans together, it's to win.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#347

Post by Ekaros »

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 wait for the day soon to come when AIs will "actively" participate in. And we have to find a term that encompasses both humans and AIs. And anyone not using the currently correct one will have their lives destroyed. Or if someone finds recording from using previously correct one and does the same.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#348

Post by Ekaros »

chr86 wrote: post #265
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…

On my work's slack, we have a bot that says (I'm paraphrasing) "please use folks, as guys is exclusionary/gendered etc".

And I would take offense to being called a folk...

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#349

Post by jcarrano »

It looks pretty much fine, except for the part that says:

> In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may affect a person's ability to participate within them.

which sort of negates all the other good aspects. If a CoC is a contract or agreement, it should provide guarantees for both sides, i.e. that inappropriate behavior will be punished but also make it exactly clear which things are inappropriate.

There are absolutely no reasons to extend the CoC to spaces outside the project other than to give the enforcers more opportunities to arbitrarily target people.

Re: GCC Adopts a Code of Conduct

#350

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

redeeman wrote: post #342
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> part of the rules is respecting that other people have other opinions. not at all. We can acknowledge that other people have opinions ( "respecting" a fact makes no sense in english) but we don't have to respect either the people or the opinions, depending on who they are or what they are: such respect can be earned and lost on merit > If you work within the system in a legal and peaceful manner, then that is fair…

> working within the system means complying with the CoC and any other terms & prerequisites to contributing and if there is no CoC? is it then respecting the system to throw a tantrum if they wont adapt one?

is it respecting the system to throw a tantrum if they want to adopt one?
Post reply on HN