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

91–100 of 270 posts

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

#91

Post by swiftcoder »

astanm wrote: post #80
swiftcoder wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something, something, paradox of tolerance. Diverse views on software development? Great. Diverse views on whether various groups deserve human rights? Not great.

The latter would be off-topic for a programming language discussion forum, certainly. But working with others that happen to hold differing views on that topic? Not a problem. It would be unreasonable to expect everyone to have the same perspective on political issues.

I think we are likely to disagree on whether "group X is not entitled to human rights" is a legitimate political view

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

#92

Post by majorchord »

vkou wrote: post #43
satisfice wrote: post #19

I want a code of conduct that explicitly allows debate, disagreement, and normalizes hurting other people’s feelings with your words. What matters is that people are operating in good faith. I would also say that IF you have been accepted as a member of a community then you and your feelings must matter to that community unless and until you are ejected from the community. There needs to be a system for accepting and…

> What matters is that people are operating in good faith. Any asshole can claim to be acting in good faith, regardless of what they've done.

You're getting downvoted but I think this is absolutely right... people are simply going to disagree with each others' definition of "good faith."

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

#93

Post by k33n »

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…

Just say your name and people will call you by that name. Politely request pronoun use if you must, but don't expect everyone to remember or even care -- especially if you're using anything but she/her or he/him.

If we accept either side's definition of who the "real abusers" are, then politics will continue to hobble projects. If you are starved of people to discuss your political views with, it's the wrong thing to do to vomit those out in a programming thread. Go make some real friends if you're looking to do that. Not everyone will see the world the way you do.

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

#94

Post by majorchord »

u_sama wrote: post #76
thrance wrote: post #50

> DHH condemned detailed and strict CoC like the Contributor Covenant as a “trojan horse” that should be purged from projects. Of course he would, he has made several transphobic remarks in the past. Normal people shouldn't take issue with the mere existence of a markdown document that basically says "don't be a dick to people because of who they are". Ostracizing people from projects because you are prejudiced again…

I think the issue with CoC is that they have been used in the past by politically motivated (notably on the left) activists to take control of a project and ensure a political line. You may agree with such a political line like anti-fascism, inclusion and what not. But the issue is that you have opened the door to politics inside what ought to be a technical area, and historically, politics change, the ideas you agre…

> the issue is that you have opened the door to politics inside what ought to be a technical area

Unless you're willing and able to enforce a BDFL stance, I don't think there is actually any alternative.

As soon as people start disagreeing with any choices you make, and it's not well-understood that "what I say goes", you're going to have people who want to try to change how you run things, and that is the definition of politics.

Either you force your own politics on people, or you open yourself up to accepting changes from other people... which is still politics.

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

#95

Post by danaris »

ranger_danger wrote: post #81
danaris wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If someone is behaving poorly, first of all, a CoC will not deter them. I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You're treating humanity as if it's divided into two distinct sections: Those Who Behave Well, and Those Who Behave Poorly. In reality, different humans have different ranges of ways they prefer to act, and most are quite amenable to reasonable, clearly-stated codes of conduct for interaction in a particular…

> But there are many, many more who would cause friction with others in such a community without a code of conduct Hard disagree... I've never seen one have this effect. IMO you don't need a CoC to suddenly understand what should already be common sense i.e. don't be a dick. Either they were already going to act that way, or they weren't.

> I've never seen one have this effect.

How do you think you would see it?

Under normal circumstances, what it would look like from the outside is just...someone not causing friction, because there is a code of conduct. Or someone causing friction, because there isn't one.

The former looks identical to someone who would never have caused trouble in the first place, and the latter looks, if not identical, at least very similar to someone who would have caused trouble, no matter what.

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

#96

Post by HankStallone »

serial_dev wrote: post #5

The thing is that codes of conduct do not help honest actors “regulate” and deal with troublemakers. I used to organize meetups and I visited meetups organized by others who had code of conduct, and I just never understood what they were hoping to achieve with that. If someone behaves poorly, you can point at a document all you want, but it doesn’t help you deal that the problematic individual. A document that you pu…

Right. I've seen a CoC used as a power-grab by people who had barely made any contributions to a project, when the people in charge were too easy-going or naive to shut down dishonest use of it, so they tended to side with the squeaky wheel. Once the bad actors got people they didn't like removed or driven away from the project, they just got worse, saying things like "go kill yourself" without consequence, because they were now in control and could interpret the code however they liked or just ignore it.

You can't write a CoC that will prevent bad behavior from bad actors in charge, so it's worthless at best and a weapon for the unscrupulous at worst. What matters is who enforces standards of behavior, and if those people are decent and honest, no written code is necessary.

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

#97

Post by raxxorraxor »

blueflow wrote: post #25
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And we didn’t even talk about how it is being misused. People would point to these documents to silence and shut out people they don’t like and at the same time tolerate poor behavior that are clearly in violation of code of conduct by people they do like or whose politics or opinions they share. Has it occurred to you that's actually exactly why they exist? :)

I mean. Whenever a code of conduct was installed in a project i was passionate about, i could look up the contributor on twitter/fediverse and see that they are a zealot about their cause. Deflecting and uncompromising, very unagreeable. They would be the last persons to know how to make a community comfy.

It just wasn't a very wholesome crowd. I don't have to like everyone, but I expect everyone to not try to ban people just because they have the unfavorable opinion du jours. Maybe write that in a COC, but it should be a premise to begin with.

On a completely unrelated note, you very, very rarely find real fascists in open source software projects.

And for even less favorable characters it seemed that it was just powerplay by some actors that wouldn't convince their own mother that they are the most untoxic of them all.

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

vkou wrote: post #39
arpinum wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-meritocracy was in in some CoCs, arguing in its favour was a reason for exclusion from an event / project. Even if the argument happened somewhere else on the internet and not in the project.

Whenever I see someone dying on the hill of fighting for 'meritocracy', in the words of another poster in this subthread, I have found them to be: > ...a zealot about their cause. Deflecting and uncompromising, very unagreeable. They would be the last persons to know how to make a community comfy. ... And typically with a giant chip on their shoulder. The real world's a little bit more complicated than the spherical…

[deleted]

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

#99

Post by raxxorraxor »

vkou wrote: post #39
arpinum wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-meritocracy was in in some CoCs, arguing in its favour was a reason for exclusion from an event / project. Even if the argument happened somewhere else on the internet and not in the project.

Whenever I see someone dying on the hill of fighting for 'meritocracy', in the words of another poster in this subthread, I have found them to be: > ...a zealot about their cause. Deflecting and uncompromising, very unagreeable. They would be the last persons to know how to make a community comfy. ... And typically with a giant chip on their shoulder. The real world's a little bit more complicated than the spherical…

It highly depends on what you understand that word to mean. At first it was just meant to to pronounce fairness. Nothing more to it. It was used in a context to explicitly disregard who people are and focus on what they do.

And of course it wasn't meant as an instruction manual for how to run a society. It was quite explicitly a message that you are not judged by who you are. That is it, there is no ideology, there is no grand idea. That is media garbage that filled your head with a phantom.

And honestly, that did a much better job than most COC I read.

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

#100

Post by HankStallone »

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #22
squigz wrote: post #14

It seems some people need to re-read the title and article and consider the words "heavy", "bureaucratic" and the like No, CoCs - or rules in general - are not inherently bad. HN has some, which the moderators and the community enforce well, and it's generally one of the best platforms on the Internet for intelligent discussion. Yes, heavy CoCs can be weaponized and abused, if there is little or no trust between the…

> You think moderators need to establish a CoC to push their politics on people if they want? How does that even make sense? Why not just... do that, without a CoC? I don't think this is what generally happens, or what people are wary of. I think group participants [sometimes] coerce moderators into establishing a CoC in order to have a tool to reach for in service of silencing voices they regard as "problematic".

Often the moderator is the project lead (or one of them), who may not be suited to adjudicating personal disputes and probably has better things to do. That can result in siding with the louder faction in the hopes that giving them what they want will satisfy them and let everyone get back to work. Or worse, turning the job of moderation over to them because they seem to want it, and then the petty tyranny is off to the races.

I think that happens less now that people are aware of the danger; but a decade or so ago it was a real problem because no one saw it coming.

Post reply on HN