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

141–150 of 270 posts

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

#141

Post by thrance »

wastle wrote: post #138
thrance wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not American, and I don't think that "trans people have a right to participate in society" is a political take. The real issue is with people thinking that "trans people shouldn't exist" is a valid opinion to hold, and I don't feel particularly bad for them being "silenced". If this view falls in the American left's umbrella, then I'm sorry to say: they're objectively right and fuck the guys who hold anti-human…

The actual divisive issue is whether people who say they are the opposite sex to what they really are should be granted access to spaces that are designated for the sole use of the opposite sex. This gets relabelled by activists for the trans ideological cause with phrases like "the right to participate in society" and even "the right to exist", but these are so far from what is actually being demanded that it's esse…

Spaces such as online open-source communities? This is nonsensical, listen to yourself. Your anti-human bias shows and it's actually disturbing. What spaces are you even talking about and why do you think people that look, act, talk and think exactly like their members should be barred from them?

> trans ideological cause

Got it, demanding human rights apply to trans people is now an "ideological stance". The American Overton window is so far right, it's crazy people can hold such views and think they're being reasonable.

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

#142

Post by thunderfork »

skissane wrote: post #139
pjc50 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Likely more than 50% of the world's population agrees with viewpoints that some would label "trans-eliminationist rhetoric". So if you are saying anyone who ever expresses such viewpoints–even in forums completely unrelated to the project–is barred from contributing to it, you are potentially excluding more than half of contemporary humanity.

[dead]

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

#143

Post by wastle »

thrance wrote: post #141
wastle wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual divisive issue is whether people who say they are the opposite sex to what they really are should be granted access to spaces that are designated for the sole use of the opposite sex. This gets relabelled by activists for the trans ideological cause with phrases like "the right to participate in society" and even "the right to exist", but these are so far from what is actually being demanded that it's esse…

Spaces such as online open-source communities? This is nonsensical, listen to yourself. Your anti-human bias shows and it's actually disturbing. What spaces are you even talking about and why do you think people that look, act, talk and think exactly like their members should be barred from them? > trans ideological cause Got it, demanding human rights apply to trans people is now an "ideological stance". The America…

No, typically this issue is focused around spaces like female-only refuges and safe spaces, locker rooms and changing rooms, prisons, sports competitions, and so on. The divisive point being whether males who say they are female should be refused or granted access.

That you have chosen to characterise this with wording like "anti-human bias" and "demanding human rights apply" further illustrates my point.

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

#144

Post by OkayPhysicist »

serial_dev wrote: post #52
ang_cire wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If someone is behaving poorly, first of all, a CoC will not deter them I think you mean, "if someone is behaving poorly, the coc did not deter them". The people who it did deter aren't behaving poorly.

I'm just having a hard time imagining someone who wants to be racist sexist xenophobe jerk to other people, but they saw you drafted a CoC last year in the root of your repository, so they won't... Or they were racist sexist xenophobe jerks, then you point out that "our community has a CoC", and they will stop. None of these things happen in real life.

Written rules aren't for the offenders, they're for the conflict-adverse community members who get uncomfortable when someone needs to be thrown out for community health reasons. They don't really have strong opinions supporting the person's behavior, but they're uncomfortable with the idea of people getting exiled from the community, so come slithering out to protest when an asshole is exiled for being an asshole. Since their primary reason for speaking up in the first place is discomfort with conflict, a quick "they broke the rules" tends defuse further argument.

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

#145

Post by OkayPhysicist »

skissane wrote: post #139
pjc50 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Likely more than 50% of the world's population agrees with viewpoints that some would label "trans-eliminationist rhetoric". So if you are saying anyone who ever expresses such viewpoints–even in forums completely unrelated to the project–is barred from contributing to it, you are potentially excluding more than half of contemporary humanity.

A community doesn't exist for "the majority of the world". It exists for its community. If a community doesn't want bigots (as they shouldn't), they absolutely should exclude them.

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

#146

Post by thunderfork »

majorchord wrote: post #132
lowsong wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that you've made my point really quite well. I gave perhaps the most basic possible example of accommodation, adjusting a single word with no impact on other project members and you were still able to argue about it. > Maybe you believe it is necessary to identify yourself online as belonging to some group, perhaps in order to force a change, but again I think this is just trying to play politics where it's o…

I think "playing politics" means trying to get people to change something, or how a group of people is managed. Not all projects want other people telling them what to do or what they should or shouldn't do, and I think that's perfectly ok. If "people being themselves" means making SJW politics their entire identity and spraying it across the internet, then I'd say it's likely they're not going to be welcome in many…

[dead]

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

#147

Post by Khaine »

astanm wrote: post #111
swiftcoder wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

As long as these views aren't thrashed out in the collaborative spaces to which the CoC applies, it doesn't really matter. (As a personal preference, I'd rather not know the political views, legitimate or otherwise, of people I work with. It's not relevant.)

Except people have enforced CoC's against people for expressing views on other platforms because those views make other people feel unsafe in those collaborative spaces.

I have only ever seen CoC's abused to push out people with anti-social just views.

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

#148

Post by ranger_danger »

danaris wrote: post #136
ranger_danger wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Another commenter (cannot find their name now but I saved the text) said exactly what my experience has been: > A written code of conduct can legitimize petty disputes based on interpretations of the text, even if the issue itself is something…

> The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. > And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Both correct. By definition, in fact. CoCs are for the people in the middle of those . Who do, in fact, exist.

I think if someone needs to be told to be nice... it's time to grow up. Open source projects are not your mother and we shouldn't have to treat people like children, nor get chastised for having that (IMO very reasonable) stance.

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

#149

Post by kelnos »

majorchord wrote: post #132
lowsong wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that you've made my point really quite well. I gave perhaps the most basic possible example of accommodation, adjusting a single word with no impact on other project members and you were still able to argue about it. > Maybe you believe it is necessary to identify yourself online as belonging to some group, perhaps in order to force a change, but again I think this is just trying to play politics where it's o…

I think "playing politics" means trying to get people to change something, or how a group of people is managed. Not all projects want other people telling them what to do or what they should or shouldn't do, and I think that's perfectly ok. If "people being themselves" means making SJW politics their entire identity and spraying it across the internet, then I'd say it's likely they're not going to be welcome in many…

> I think "playing politics" means trying to get people to change something, or how a group of people is managed.

That's probably where the disagreement/misunderstanding is. I don't think that's a definition of "playing politics" that most people would agree with.

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

#150

Post by kelnos »

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 agree with you in general with your automatic skepticism with something DHH might say on this topic, but:

> 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".

But that's not what it says. Maybe you can in some squinty way reduce it to that, but that's not all these sorts of documents say, and that's the problem. Most CoCs are fairly specific and strict in what they say people should and shouldn't do, and some of them (like the Contributor Covenant) even includes a process for submitting complaints, and addressing those complaints.

A CoC that just says -- explicitly, without a huge amount of other language -- "don't be a dick" is more or less what ESR and DHH are advocating for. The article goes into detail as to why the author believes that a long, detailed CoC is harmful, and why even if it does essentially just say "don't be a dick", that can cause lots of problems for projects.

Post reply on HN