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

201–210 of 270 posts

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

#201

Post by serial_dev »

ang_cire wrote: post #188
serial_dev wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Not every person who does something problematic is actively seeking to do so in order to hurt someone . Also, there are plenty of people who are looking for spaces that are "okay" with their views, and a CoC that makes it clear the space is not can absolutely make them avoid it. You are so focused on the strawman of problematic people being mustache-twirling villains trying to disrupt spaces they dislike, that you're…

> you're discounting the actual purpose of CoCs, which is to make it clear who your space is for

Code of conduct is not about that. It's about how to behave. My community is not that special that you need a user manual on how to behave, you should have learned it by age 10, latest.

Technology Z meetup / user group is a space for people who are interested in Technology Z. Repository Y is a space for people who are interested in Repository Y.

If someone needs a CoC to figure that out, bad luck.

You want to start discussion about War X, vilify everyone just by being born in that country, please do it outside my repo / user group. Plenty of spaces you can do it and there, you'll be welcome to do so. Want to talk about evil black / white / DEI / right wing people, please also leave my group out of it.

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

#202

Post by skissane »

HelloNurse wrote: post #192
skissane wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, if a person is a traditionalist/conservative Orthodox Jew, who holds traditional “non-affirming” views on LGBT issues-do those views count as “eliminationist rhetoric”? If a project decides it won’t welcome people who believe what almost all conservative/traditionalist Orthodox Jews believe (even if they keep those beliefs to themselves in project forums), it is essentially deciding that Jews (of that kind) aren’…

There's a clear difference between respecting people and hate speech; no project should welcome someone who contributes inappropriate insults and off-topic rants. If that stereotypical Orthodox Jew wants to be a valuable community member, they can keep their hostile opinions to themselves, and nobody will consider them troublemakers. Obviously they won't feel welcome because they realize that the majority would despi…

I think the distinction is whether they express their views in project settings or in unrelated settings. If they express them in project settings, then I can’t see how that could possibly be on-topic, which makes it disruptive behaviour. But if they express them in unrelated settings, and then someone else brings that to the attention of the project-well, then it has nothing to do with the project, so the project should refuse to get involved

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

#203

Post by HelloNurse »

skissane wrote: post #202
HelloNurse wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a clear difference between respecting people and hate speech; no project should welcome someone who contributes inappropriate insults and off-topic rants. If that stereotypical Orthodox Jew wants to be a valuable community member, they can keep their hostile opinions to themselves, and nobody will consider them troublemakers. Obviously they won't feel welcome because they realize that the majority would despi…

I think the distinction is whether they express their views in project settings or in unrelated settings. If they express them in project settings, then I can’t see how that could possibly be on-topic, which makes it disruptive behaviour. But if they express them in unrelated settings, and then someone else brings that to the attention of the project-well, then it has nothing to do with the project, so the project sh…

"someone else brings that to the attention of the project"

This is what an intolerant troublemaker would do, demonstrating that they are worse than the restrained bigot they are denouncing.

The will to hurt people is, or should be, a good indicator of which side is more wrong.

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

#204

Post by EnergyAmy »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #187
EnergyAmy wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes

Is genuine discussion typically like this? I'm not really getting a sense of back and forth. It sounds more like wanting to have one side of a conversation without really inviting a response or room for nuance.

I directly addressed your statement. "Trans people existing" is a vague statement that avoids talking about specifics. Discourse is toxic because of rhetorical tricks like this where you desperately try to avoid actual discussion.

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

#205

Post by thrance »

u_sama wrote: post #198
thrance wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice how all these so-called TERFs ally themselves with the most anti-feminist crowd, and finally realize it has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-critical_feminism#Polit...

Most historical feminists would be labelled TERFs today, just like the most liberal 19th century politicians would be seen as conservative. TERFS are still feminists. Communists also allied themselves with fascists during the inter-war period yet you can still consider them as separate.

> Most historical feminists would be labelled TERFs today, just like the most liberal 19th century politicians would be seen as conservative.

Who cares?

> TERFS are still feminists.

You can't be a feminist and side with the people standing against legal abortions, lesbian marriage, gender equality, equal opportunity, equal pay, equal access to education, etc. Simple as that.

The conservative idea of a woman is one of a servile housewife who never leaves the house. No matter how you frame it, these people are anti-feminist, and so are the TERFs that consistently side with them.

> Communists also allied themselves with fascists during the inter-war period yet you can still consider them as separate.

What the hell are you going on about? I would consider the Soviets fascists, but how is that relevant in any way to TERFs not being feminists?

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

#206

Post by ranger_danger »

kelnos wrote: post #152
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…

> 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. And of course that shouldn't matter for an online virtual space. But that's unfortunately not it. There are many many people who believe that being trans isn't real, and that anyone who claims to be trans has a mental illne…

> It's not a "political stance" to say that people should

I think trying to tell people what they should or shouldn't do is kindof the definition of politics.

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

#207

Post by ranger_danger »

ryan_lane wrote: post #183

To the folks that say they won't contribute if there's a CoC: this just proves they're working. If you can't avoid the behavior called out in a CoC, then we don't want you to contribute. Thank you for self-selecting yourself away from us. I dealt with abusive contributors at Wikimedia Foundation for years, and it wasn't until a CoC was added that coordinators were actually empowered to ban those abusive volunteers. C…

False equivalence IMO... you're implying that people who don't want a CoC will actually behave badly, and I don't think that's accurate at all, at least not for the majority.

> it wasn't until a CoC was added that coordinators were actually empowered to ban those abusive volunteers

IMO that is just bad leadership... they could (and should) have taken action against abusive people regardless.

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

#208

Post by thrance »

u_sama wrote: post #197
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…

You are most certainly Western, or if not part of the educated and Western brought elites of the Global South. But I most certainly assure you that in the other grand civilizations, the idea you expounded is the standard and just as you feel this idea is the objectively right one, in the other societies with other codes and ethics (Confucian, Vedic/Buddhist, Islamic or non Western Christian), the people living in the…

I am indeed "Western" as you put it, and generally adhere to the description you gave of me. I do recognize my statement is political, although I did not use the word "objectively" lightly and feel like I can justify my position quite solidly. So, while the other side may claim their ideas as "objectively right" too, I am yet to see any reasoning that would give credance to such claims. Here is a succint overview of the reasoning I used to arrive at my current position on trans-identity:

Facts (that you should be able to verify easily through e.g. a quick Google Scholar session):

1. Gender dysphoria is real and touches a significant part of the population. It makes those affected by it suffer mentally.

2. Transition is the only known way to cure gender dysphoria, and it does indeed work.

3. People very rarely regret transitioning (4. Trans people are no more susceptible to committing crime (sexual or else) than the average person, if not slightly less so (they are, on the other hand, ~4 times as likely to be victims of violent crimes, because of the prejudice and rhetoric targeted at them).

Axioms (that I hope we both agree on):

1. Helping people feel better, or at least not hindering them while they try to, is good.

2. Ostracizing people because of something they can't change is bad.

Conlusions (that you have to agree with if you accept my axioms and my reasoning):

1. Facts 1, 2 and 3 + Axiom 1 => We should let trans people transition, and whenever possible, even help them to.

2. Fact 4 + Axiom 2 + Conclusion 1 => We should let trans people participate in society as no one gets hurt in doing so, and trans people have to transition for their own good, so it would be unfair to attack them on that basis.

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

#209

Post by OkayPhysicist »

svieira wrote: post #171
OkayPhysicist wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. S…

Why wouldn't "I have taken a dislike to them. Pray I do not take a dislike to you as well" also solve these people's problems? There's surely something more than "dislike of conflict" here, or else they wouldn't invite conflict by disagreeing with the now decided and closed conflict's resolution.

Yeah, if a community has someone with that kind of generally trusted authority, that works great. If a community doesn't, agreed upon rules are the next best thing.

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

#210

Post by wastle »

thrance wrote: post #194
wastle wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you see it as? In the UK, where I am from, the counter to the trans ideological position tends to be from a feminist-influenced perspective, emphasising women's sex-based rights.

Notice how all these so-called TERFs ally themselves with the most anti-feminist crowd, and finally realize it has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-critical_feminism#Polit...

That's not true. JK Rowling is a good counterexample to your claim, as are the women who brought the FWS case to the UK's Supreme Court (and won), and as are so many other women whose feminist advocacy involves this topic.
Post reply on HN