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

Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 637 posts

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#231

Post by bellyfullofbac »

ergl wrote: post #101

> That's common sense. We all know who are protected classes. For instance, members of board of directors of the big corporations are a protected class. Uh… is this a troll? Like other commented said, this feels like a anti-CoC thing or an extreme case of Poe's law, at least.

It's probably a troll.

Man, the passionated bikeshedding over CoCs in some communities and even in here, with many extremist viewpoints from both sides, makes me glad I'm not really attached to any community. If they're stupid, why should I spend the emotional energy? Just walk away.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#232

Post by eloisant »

Bayart wrote: post #223
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in English you have the neutral word "they". In french you only have the plural of "he" or "she". This means that when you point to a mixed crowd, you must choose which of the plurals you use. The grammatical rule is that one male flips the plural gender to male. If you do not know the sexes, the plural is male. As a French, the construction comes naturally because we've been taught that at school since kind…

>As a French, the construction comes naturally because we've been taught that at school since kindergarten. This always sounded a bit weird, though. If you follow the grammatical history of French, the neutral gender just got folded into masculine. >but some innovative-but-not-distruptive changes would be welcome You can't really produce grammar by decree, at best you can systematize what already exists. The only "sa…

> If you follow the grammatical history of French, the neutral gender just got folded into masculine.

This is not just grammatical history, this is the current grammar rules.

However some people are trying to force a change of the rule by making up new words and rules, such as "iels" instead of "ils/elles".

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#233

Post by cybrox »

interactivecode wrote: post #230
koonsolo wrote: post #185

I think this is a big difference between US and EU. In EU we like to joke around, tease each other, and not get fired over that. When we tell a sexist joke with a woman present, you will get a witty reply from them, not a call to HR. I hope this US bullshit stays in US. Seems that EU women are not victims but can stand their own ground.

Seems more like you knowing it's a sexist joke should be enough reasons not to make it. I sincerely hope you agree that intentional bigotry has no place anywhere. It's sexist regardless if woman are present. People are victims even if they stand their ground.

Every joke relates to something or someone who is potentially offended by it.

By this logic, you have to ban humor.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#234

Post by bellyfullofbac »

eljimmy wrote: post #128

Seems like a poorly misinterpreted joke about how people will often mention a younger age for their birthday when they’re getting into their older ages? Is that the joke? If this joke is told by women more often than men (in my experience it is), is it sexist to point that out? Would this have received the same reaction if the joke was made by a woman? Some things to ponder, no doubt. However, in this day and age I p…

How about a joke in the context of saving money that said "Must've been done by a Jew" (my supremely limited interaction - with one person from Israel - was about him trying to get more money from the organization I was representing), would it be bigoted to point that out?

For my taste that "must've been a woman" line was cringeworthy. He could've said "Well I guess someone doesn't want to grow old".

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#235

Post by krageon »

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #118
not2b wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, some people who want to make sexist jokes on the mailing list with impunity pointed to the language about tolerating opposing views to claim that their desire to belittle women on the mailing list must be tolerated. Maybe they should point to Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance edit: evidently someone thinks this comment is worthy of a downvote. I…

But...like...just say no? Am I missing something? If the current CoC covers offensive jokes like the one in question, then simply assert that the CoC covers it and be done with it. If someone is willing to go through the CoC with a fine tooth comb, they're likely going to find something they could potentially use to defend themselves. Just say no! The changes open up so much interpretation that anyone could use it to…

> just say no

It is somewhat of a modern cultural failing that we cannot moderate without having a CoC to point to and say "see? You're bad, it says so here". A good moderator can make the value judgements necessary to keep a community relatively healthy. For some reason a lot of folks have forgotten a CoC does not change that at all.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#236

Post by krageon »

andrew_ wrote: post #78
phone8675309 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't educate myself if you don't give me a pointer. That said, "please help me understand" is sometimes a bad faith tactic to claim ignorance of basic empathy.

the "bad faith actor/tactic" argument is a dismissive mechanism to justify overreaction.

> dismissive mechanism

Yes, it is. It is meant to dismiss trolls.

> to justify overreaction

Trolls should be banned, because they are poison to a community. As such, it is not an overreaction to use a mechanism like this.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#238

Post by krageon »

koonsolo wrote: post #185

I think this is a big difference between US and EU. In EU we like to joke around, tease each other, and not get fired over that. When we tell a sexist joke with a woman present, you will get a witty reply from them, not a call to HR. I hope this US bullshit stays in US. Seems that EU women are not victims but can stand their own ground.

> you will get a witty reply from them, not a call to HR.

This depends heavily on where you work. It is not healthy for your career to assume this.

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#239

Post by [deleted] »

dfgjnirf wrote: post #46

I thought this was a troll. I feel that the identifying of CEOs of big companies as a protected class may have been a tipping of the hat. There seems to be a common strategy by right wing accelerationists that involve masquerading as left wing and pushing things into absurdity.

[deleted]

Re: Ruby removed “Participants will be tolerant of opposing views” from its CoC

#240

Post by zozbot234 »

js8 wrote: post #213
zozbot234 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Protected class" means stuff like race, sex or veteran status. So if you harass a random conference-goer at a Ruby-focused event, that cannot be addressed under the CoC because you haven't evidenced harassment towards a protected class as a whole (e.g. all veterans)? How does that even make sense?

Honest question - are young or old also a protected class? I disagree that CoC clauses should be based on protected classes only, because I think there are possible types of discrimination that should be addressed in CoC.

In a legal context, yes, age is a protected class. So if past practice is anything to go with, I guess quips like "ok boomer" will now be officially verboten on the Ruby mailing lists and in Ruby events.
Post reply on HN