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

Nanomsg: Stepping Down

garrett.damore.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 69 posts

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#11

Post by exolymph »

optimuspaul wrote: post #10
exolymph wrote: post #2

I disagree with him regarding the usefulness of CoCs -- spelling out the rules of engagement can be powerful -- but I respect that he put his money where his mouth is, so to speak.

I tend to agree with you. I do think that the common sense "don't be a dick" shouldn't need to be explicitly expressed as a rule we all follow. But it should also be common sense not to put your hands near a spinning metal blade, but we have those warnings on lawnmowers. I think where a CoC provides it value is defining the procedures for when the CoC is violated, which it no doubt will be.

I think Rachel Nabors' article on the topic is excellent: http://rachelnabors.com/2015/09/01/code-of-conduct/

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#12

Post by mst »

SwellJoe wrote: post #8
WizzleKake wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time This is an odd assumption to make.

Is it? It may seem that way to a white dude (I'm a white dude, and I suffered from the delusion that tech communities were inclusive for decades), surrounded by white dudes. You're not alone...lots of people think tech is inclusive. I always assumed that our communities were more welcoming than usual, despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in t…

The public discussion about this stuff doesn't necessarily justify 'most' but it absolutely demonstrates 'many'. And 'many' seems to me to be quite sufficient to justify CoC adoption as being positive overall.

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#14

Post by teh_klev »

He gives off mixed signals here:

https://www.freelists.org/post/nanomsg/Adopting-a-CoC,11

Now, me personally, I couldn’t give a crap whether a project has a CoC or not.

Frankly, if someone acts irredeemably toxically in this project, I won’t feel like I need to have a CoC to justify taking corrective action — I’ll just take the action

So, I’m definitely not going to “require” a CoC; if someone acts like an ass then they can expect me to take some kind of action.

But then comes out with:

I’m pretty disheartened by the intensely negative response this suggestion has drawn;

I'm at a loss as to why he didn't just let the discussion roll for a bit without expressing his "disheartened" feelings and if the outcome from active members is "we don't think this is a good idea" then let it go. He's already stated that thus far the project has no known issues regarding conduct and that anyone being an asshat dickhead would be dealt with anyway.

Odd.

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#15

Post by moonchrome »

SwellJoe wrote: post #8
WizzleKake wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time This is an odd assumption to make.

Is it? It may seem that way to a white dude (I'm a white dude, and I suffered from the delusion that tech communities were inclusive for decades), surrounded by white dudes. You're not alone...lots of people think tech is inclusive. I always assumed that our communities were more welcoming than usual, despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in t…

>despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in tech.

Are asians suddenly white and only black people are people of color ? I see asians significantly represented in the tech community (especially India with English history and emigration to west). And they are at all levels of tech from CEO to us regular code monkeys.

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#16

Post by rdtsc »

I don't understand. The people who are -1, what do they care if it is adopted? Is CoC that controversial? Are personal attacks, doxing, trolling and slurs part of their daily routine they will be seriously inconvenienced by inability to use them?

---

* The use of sexualized language or imagery

* Personal attacks

* Trolling or insulting/derogatory comments

* Public or private harassment

* Publishing other's private information, such as physical or electronic addresses, without explicit permission

* Other unethical or unprofessional conduct

---

As a maintainer they should have just said "There is a CoC now. Check it out: . Happy new year everyone".

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#18

Post by gedy »

optimuspaul wrote: post #10
exolymph wrote: post #2

I disagree with him regarding the usefulness of CoCs -- spelling out the rules of engagement can be powerful -- but I respect that he put his money where his mouth is, so to speak.

I tend to agree with you. I do think that the common sense "don't be a dick" shouldn't need to be explicitly expressed as a rule we all follow. But it should also be common sense not to put your hands near a spinning metal blade, but we have those warnings on lawnmowers. I think where a CoC provides it value is defining the procedures for when the CoC is violated, which it no doubt will be.

> we have those warnings on lawnmowers

because of lawsuit-happy culture, not due to lack of common sense.

Rachel Nabor's article is interesting, but not sure how a CoC fixes dealing with a boorish weirdo outside the conference.

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#19

Post by mpweiher »

SwellJoe wrote: post #8
WizzleKake wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time This is an odd assumption to make.

Is it? It may seem that way to a white dude (I'm a white dude, and I suffered from the delusion that tech communities were inclusive for decades), surrounded by white dudes. You're not alone...lots of people think tech is inclusive. I always assumed that our communities were more welcoming than usual, despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in t…

> despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in tech

Low participation is evidence of exactly one thing: low participation. It says nothing about the causes and is not evidence of non-inclusiveness.

Re: Nanomsg: Stepping Down

#20

Post by davis »

mahouse wrote: post #13

CoCs are worthless. If a community is not able to detect poisonous behaviour by itself, a .txt file won't help.

You may think they are "worthless" but clearly some people think they they have value.

Which one do you think is more poisonous? Making a fuss over the maintainer wanting to impose one or just accepting that someone else sees value in something you don't and agreeing to the CoC.

Post reply on HN