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

Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

shujisado.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 270 posts

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#61

Post by HelloNurse »

pjc50 wrote: post #51
astanm wrote: post #16

This, from the Ruby CoC, is key: > Participants are expected to be tolerant of opposing views. If you can't tolerate that others will have different perspectives to you then it means you're likely to be a very difficult and inflexible person to work with.

This is one of those things that falls apart on the actual content. If you have a trans contributor and someone who comes in with trans-eliminationist rhetoric, you can't then turn round and say the trans person is being "inflexible" for refusing to work with them.

The correct answer is reacting harshly to "trans-eliminationist rhetoric" from a weird extremist, with an ultimatum or immediate expulsion, before the trans contributor complains.

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#62

Post by throwaway2046 »

lowsong wrote: post #28

A big part of a CoC that this article, as most discussions on the topic, miss is that they provide a signal to new contributors from marginalized groups, who may have faced abuse or violence in other spaces, that this community will be safe for them to contribute to and - as many anti-CoC folk like to say - get on with the tech. Not having a CoC doesn't mean a project is going to be unsafe to work in. But it means wh…

> marginalized groups, who may have faced abuse or violence in other spaces

Can you cite examples of users facing abuse or violence while contributing to a tech project? And how exactly does a CoC guarantee the safety you mentioned?

> when another community member refuses to work with you

Members are free to choose who to work with regardless of whether a CoC exists or not.

> belittles your work constantly

Your work may not be up to the project's standards and anyone pointing that out may hurt your feelings, and that's fine. You can't expect project maintainers to coddle each contributor when there's work to be done. Most CoCs are at odds with that because they value contributors' feelings over clear communication that helps a project advance.

> there is nothing to be done

You could communicate your grievances to the project maintainers directly, but you're not guaranteed a reply even with a CoC. In fact I'd argue that with a CoC it's easier for maintainers to dismiss criticism by labeling it as "non welcoming" or "non inclusive" or any other loose emotionally-driven term.

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#63

Post by lowsong »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #45
lowsong wrote: post #28

A big part of a CoC that this article, as most discussions on the topic, miss is that they provide a signal to new contributors from marginalized groups, who may have faced abuse or violence in other spaces, that this community will be safe for them to contribute to and - as many anti-CoC folk like to say - get on with the tech. Not having a CoC doesn't mean a project is going to be unsafe to work in. But it means wh…

> to new contributors from marginalized groups, For software projects that are overwhelmingly conducted online the very concept of "marginalized group" is close to irrelevant and meaningless [1]. I think what happens is that some people want to be very, very vocal about whatever "group" they belong to and want to feel offended and oppressed. In recent years, arguments and campaigns against specific technical terms ('…

> For software projects that are overwhelmingly conducted online the very concept of "marginalized group" is close to irrelevant

I wish this were true, but it simply isn't. If a group is full of white cis heterosexual guys and someone turns up with a random screen name and says nothing about themselves, everyone assumes they are also a white cis hetero guy even if they're not. The implication is "you have to conform, and if you don't then you don't belong".

The reality is that for many people, their mere public existence is seen as a political statement. Often times asking for the most simple of accommodations or changes is seen as "being vocal" or starting an argument.

I'll give you a hypothetical. Let's say a group of developers is all-male, and a leader starts off every meeting with "hey guys". Then, a developer who is a woman joins the project. They ask that leader "When you say it like that it implicitly excludes me, It would mean a lot to me if you said 'everyone' instead." I think that's a pretty reasonable request, it asks very little of the leader (to change one word), has no impact for everyone else, and means a lot to some. But to many, many people that would be viewed as "suppressing speech" or "weaponizing oppression".

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#64

Post by swiftcoder »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #2

> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. ESR went even further, asserting that CoC are nothing more than a “tool for troublemakers” and that the best course of action is to delete them entirely from projects. At this point, in 2025, does anybody seriously doubt that they're a "tool for troublemakers"? A lot of people who would other…

So the guy who regularly writes about how brown people are invading his country, and the guy who thinks women in tech are all trying to entrap him with rape accusations... don't think CoCs are a good idea? Colour me surprised

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#65

Post by ishouldbework »

thrance wrote: post #56
mytailorisrich wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to new contributors from marginalized groups, For software projects that are overwhelmingly conducted online the very concept of "marginalized group" is close to irrelevant and meaningless [1]. I think what happens is that some people want to be very, very vocal about whatever "group" they belong to and want to feel offended and oppressed. In recent years, arguments and campaigns against specific technical terms ('…

Do you believe that online harassment is completely made up and never happened to anyone ever? Because it sounds like you do.

[dead]

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#66

Post by florkbork »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #2

> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. ESR went even further, asserting that CoC are nothing more than a “tool for troublemakers” and that the best course of action is to delete them entirely from projects. At this point, in 2025, does anybody seriously doubt that they're a "tool for troublemakers"? A lot of people who would other…

Let's restate your points a bit, but using the words "ethics" rather than CoC.

Is publishing an ethical standpoint a "trouble making"? Depends, doesn't it? What if you examine the most common top ethical viewpoints you are aware of. For me, it's loud groups like say, PETA, Extinction Rebellion, etc who are fairly populist.

Are they making trouble? Sure. But for whom? Would you personally do what these people are doing? Probably no. Would you personally do what the people they are "making trouble" for are doing? (In my example, Animal harm, empowering climate change?) I am going to suggest that you would probably say "no, I don't want to harm things/people/etc; as I would probably feel bad for doing it and being personally responsible".

If thought through like this - even if your examples of ethics are not what I chose - can you see the value in a strong, clear ethical position, even if it's to warn people? Can you see that it might challenge authority (trouble making), but that is not a bad thing a lot of the time?

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#67

Post by throwaway2046 »

swiftcoder wrote: post #64
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #2

> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. ESR went even further, asserting that CoC are nothing more than a “tool for troublemakers” and that the best course of action is to delete them entirely from projects. At this point, in 2025, does anybody seriously doubt that they're a "tool for troublemakers"? A lot of people who would other…

So the guy who regularly writes about how brown people are invading his country, and the guy who thinks women in tech are all trying to entrap him with rape accusations... don't think CoCs are a good idea? Colour me surprised

You can address the contents of the article and the views expressed by the author directly without resorting to ad hominem.

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#68

Post by HelloNurse »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #2

> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. ESR went even further, asserting that CoC are nothing more than a “tool for troublemakers” and that the best course of action is to delete them entirely from projects. At this point, in 2025, does anybody seriously doubt that they're a "tool for troublemakers"? A lot of people who would other…

Personally, I assume one or more problematic activists behind any prominent project CoC. Some might be well-intentioned but unreasonable and hard to discuss with, some might be dangerously fanatic and a constant threat, some might be power-hungry manipulators giving themselves leverage, all are a liability for the project.

Normal people shouldn't need anything more than normal morality and acceptable manners to be good project contributors.

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#69

Post by swiftcoder »

throwaway2046 wrote: post #67
swiftcoder wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the guy who regularly writes about how brown people are invading his country, and the guy who thinks women in tech are all trying to entrap him with rape accusations... don't think CoCs are a good idea? Colour me surprised

You can address the contents of the article and the views expressed by the author directly without resorting to ad hominem.

I don't see how that is ad hominem - those are the expressed views of DHH and ESR, as they have repeatedly placed in writing, of their own free will.

They are also explicitly the type of views that CoCs are designed to protect contributors from, hence why DHH and ESR would be opposed to CoCs in general.

Re: Heavy codes of conduct are unnecessary for open source projects

#70

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

florkbork wrote: post #47

Yeah, nah. Watch how an open discussion here: https://github.com/nixos/rfcs/pull/98 ... devolves into a massive outcry because a bunch of folks not behaving in good faith didn't like "we don't support fascism or bigotry". It reached the level of * Vile sock puppet attacks on a trans individual, who merely kept saying "Fascism, no thanks in this community" * "Denounce the Marxists!" As a rallying cry becomes a talking…

> If you reflect on the behaviours seen there and ask why is this so heated for proposing consequences for bad behaviour; you may come to the realisation that the advocates of bad behaviour... don't want to be accountable.

It seems the problem is that what amounts to "bad behaviour" is poorly defined, and that the detractors of "bad behaviour" can also be guilty of bad behaviour.

Post reply on HN