10 ms·

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource pr

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-11/msg00282.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

sergiotapia 7y ago
Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.
- elcaminocomplex 7y ago
  The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.
  - sergiotapia 7y ago
    before coc was snuck into these repos, was it just a shitshow of nasty people acting a fool in open source communities? I don't remember it that way.
    - Godel_unicode 7y ago
      I recommend you Google the name Linus Torvalds. You will find some truly shocking language directed at his fellow human beings.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - laresistance 7y ago
        Linus' use of explicit language was exactly something that should be used as an example. He rarely attacked people, but instead attacked the actions that they did or ideas that they had.
        DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
        He's the Gordon Ramsay of the software world. Sometimes it just takes strong language to get a point across: "your code is low quality and you're wasting my time by having me review it". And to be honest, I'd gladly take being insulted over having to waste my time. Strong language doesn't hurt anyone, but you won't ever get that wasted time back. I consider it verbal self-defense.
        Godel_unicode 7y ago
        """My flippant attacks in emails have been both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made it personal.""" https://www.businessinsider.com/linus-torvalds-linux-time-away-empathy-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/linus-torvalds-linux-time-aw...
        laresistance 7y ago
        He made those remarks after he pretty much was forced to "professionalize" by The Foundation. I do agree however that at no times should criticism of code or work become personal.
        Godel_unicode 7y ago
        I'm not sure what point you're making here? In hindsight, he views his words as inappropriate. I'm not sure I understand what the temporal distance between the words and the apology has to do with how appropriate they were.
    - vertex-four 7y ago
      Before codes of conduct, it was reasonably common for misogynistic men to get away with poor behaviour towards women in their communities “because they write good code”. I’ve suffered this directly, so have others I’m close to.
      - DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
        > Before codes of conduct, it was reasonably common for misogynistic men to get away with poor behaviour towards women in their communities “because they write good code”. And now they're just as misogynistic, but we don't get to enjoy their code. They're also hidden from view so it's less likely that someone is going to tell them to cut the crap and maybe re-evaluate their world-view. They've essentially been shoved into an echo chamber. In the end, arguing about code of conduct means arguing about the core ideas of free speech, one of them being: Do we want to segregate wrongdoers, or attempt to deal with them?
        vertex-four 7y ago
        I honestly am not amazingly fussed about what we do with them overall as long as I don’t personally have to deal with them when trying to publish some code!
        danaris 7y ago
        > And now they're just as misogynistic, but we don't get to enjoy their code. I'd rather get the code of all the women who were driven out of tech by their bigotry and hate than whatever they'd write, even if it was legendary golden code spewed forth from the fount of all wisdom.
        papermachete 7y ago
        So you have no place in the market with this destructive mindset.
        username90 7y ago
        You don't miss it, when you drive out men they just go and start new projects or companies together where they can be themselves again.
  - pdonis 7y ago
    This rosy vision depends on everyone being reasonable and using common sense and a presumption of good faith when applying the CoC. However, many of the people who are pushing for CoC in projects do not themselves meet these requirements.
  - belorn 7y ago
    I participated and co-ran a gaming community for about 10 years, and whenever drama occurred we added whatever behavior triggered it to the rule list. It grew, and grew and grew into a very large CoC. By a few year into it people caused drama over the rules, people "lawyer" over them, they got enforced selectively, people accused each other of favor-ism, splits occurred and the community almost killed itself over the rules. When the game moved into a sequel we changed the rules. Now it says "Treat others with respect and courtesy", which don't really qualify as a CoC since its basically common sense. People see it as so obvious that it not even a rule, more of a guideline. This new rule has since then been pretty stable. It keeps out exactly those who can't behave but welcomes everyone else. There has not been a single instance of arguments about selective enforcement or favor-ism in terms to how the rules get enforced. My own experience from that seems very similar when people complain about CoC. Long CoC lists tend to create fear, uncertainty and doubt within the community. It creates tiers of people where different class of people get the rules enforced differently. This in turn create a deep seated distrust.
- boffinism 7y ago
  Could you possibly elaborate? To me CoCs seem like they'd be at best a good thing and at worst harmless. What do you think is wretched and insidious about them?
  - dabbernaught420 7y ago
    At worst they can be used to restrict and exclude minority groups and to reinforce existing hierarchies (which are often unjustified).
  - DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
    While some codes of conduct boil down to "just be nice", sometimes they end up encoding very specific beliefs of the people writing them. For example, the code of conduct on dev.to [1] states that: ------------- We pledge to prioritize marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as 'leave me alone,' 'go away,' or 'I’m not discussing this with you.' Someone’s refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts Criticisms of racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions ------------- Note the "we will not act on complaints regarding [...] reverse racism". As someone who 100% disagrees with the idea that "reverse racism" is a thing (although I find the word dumb; it's just plain racism, nothing "reverse" about it) I have to ask myself: Does this mean the rules differ based on skin colour? Is something acceptable when said by a black user to a white user, but racism if it's the other way around? It's things like these that, I believe, end up turning a "code of conduct" into a de facto political manifesto designed to keep out not only unwanted behavior, but also unwanted world-views. It's those codes of conduct that create direct harm. [1] https://dev.to/code-of-conduct https://dev.to/code-of-conduct
- andrewxdiamond 7y ago
  I find that just being a normal, friendly person is enough to satisfy most, if not all CoCs. I've never had to read one, and I've never been in a situation where I was in violation of one.
  - sergiotapia 7y ago
    same but that's not my point at all.
- devnonymous 7y ago
  > It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories. Replace text with code and think about how the supposed 'meritocracy' of open source deals with the problem? Isn't 'nobody is stopping you from forking it', 'submit a pull request', 'the community/bdfl has final say', not apply here as well? Or do the benefits of open collaboration stop at code?
  - devnonymous 7y ago
    Here let me be even more clear for the downvoting-without-commenting cowards : > It's a wretched, insidious *code* sneaked in by very bad > actors into mainstream open source repositories. How would have OSS projects historically dealt with code pushed by someone, which was deemed detrimental/inferior to the overall intent and purpose of the software ? Isn't it the presumption that whatever gets absorbed / pulled in, reflects the consensus of the community involved and that the future of the project is determined by the sort of natural evolution ? ...the bazaar ? So, if the bazaar now puts value on CoCs ...you may either contribute or dissent and start up your own competing replacement. Isn't that the way it was supposed to work ?
    - username90 7y ago
      These people said they won't contribute to a project with a CoC, which is exactly what you say they should do. So what is the point of your post? They are already following your advice!
      - devnonymous 7y ago
        Umm no. Can you read threads in whatever client you are reading this on? The post I replied to said that they were put off by a CoC and alleged that this is being pushed by bad actors. My point was to say that the CoC exists in the repos because of the same reasons open source exists. Not because of insidious acts of bad actors.
- jimnotgym 7y ago
  I submit that all groups of people have a code of conduct. Not all groups write them down.
  - codezero 7y ago
    Very good point. This is similar to the concept of company culture. Every company has one but not all make it explicit.
dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
We won't. You can't force me to contribute to your project and if it has such a coc I just won't.
- thundergolfer 7y ago
  ? I'm very confused. "coc" is a "Code of Conduct" document right? How is that you're opposed to CoC _in general_?
  - dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
    Because reasonable people already know how to behave and don't need a document to tell them. I've never seen a case where a coc improved software.
    - voxl 7y ago
      The Rust compiler. There is your example.
      - dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
        What was happening that the coc helped with?
    - viraptor 7y ago
      And people "know" not to steal. Yet we need to have laws so we agree on rules and boundaries. You can think of it like a list of rules agreed on early, so the project leaders don't have to go through the arguments about what's accepted after someone crosses one person's boundaries, but not another's.
      - dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
        If someone steals from another project member or breaks other laws the police should be called.
DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
Take a look, for example, at the "contributor covenant", which github endorses [1]. It lists as its first example of unacceptable behavior: > The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind This is a perfect example of rules that are simply too broad. Say I write a comment `//normalize file path because fuck windows`. I said fuck; does this count as "sexualized language"? Do I need to be banned over this? Also, a more "fun fact" example (from the same document): > Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people Did anybody consider that this is excluding psychopaths from the community based on a psychological condition? They are, by definition, unable to feel empathy. So much for inclusivity, I guess. [1] https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/ https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/
- hacknat 7y ago
  Why do you need to swear in the commit history? And if you do, why not write something more clever. Also, saying, “fuck” and referencing sex are not the same thing, ask any harassment attorney. The law isn’t some mystery, these Code of Conduct rules weren’t written in a vacuum. Why is everyone such a baby about maintaining a basic sense of decency on a public, sometimes cross-cultural, project? Seriously, harden the f up and sacrifice something fairly trivial for the good of the group.
  - papermachete 7y ago
    The group? You mean the common denominator - they ought to grow thicker skin. The CoC is a ridiculously unnecessary and shallow piece of text made to make one transsexual famous.

sergiotapia 7y ago

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

elcaminocomplex 7y ago
The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.
- sergiotapia 7y ago
  before coc was snuck into these repos, was it just a shitshow of nasty people acting a fool in open source communities? I don't remember it that way.
  - Godel_unicode 7y ago
    I recommend you Google the name Linus Torvalds. You will find some truly shocking language directed at his fellow human beings.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - laresistance 7y ago
      Linus' use of explicit language was exactly something that should be used as an example. He rarely attacked people, but instead attacked the actions that they did or ideas that they had.
      - DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
        He's the Gordon Ramsay of the software world. Sometimes it just takes strong language to get a point across: "your code is low quality and you're wasting my time by having me review it". And to be honest, I'd gladly take being insulted over having to waste my time. Strong language doesn't hurt anyone, but you won't ever get that wasted time back. I consider it verbal self-defense.
      - Godel_unicode 7y ago
        """My flippant attacks in emails have been both unprofessional and uncalled for. Especially at times when I made it personal.""" https://www.businessinsider.com/linus-torvalds-linux-time-away-empathy-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/linus-torvalds-linux-time-aw...
        laresistance 7y ago
        He made those remarks after he pretty much was forced to "professionalize" by The Foundation. I do agree however that at no times should criticism of code or work become personal.
        Godel_unicode 7y ago
        I'm not sure what point you're making here? In hindsight, he views his words as inappropriate. I'm not sure I understand what the temporal distance between the words and the apology has to do with how appropriate they were.
  - vertex-four 7y ago
    Before codes of conduct, it was reasonably common for misogynistic men to get away with poor behaviour towards women in their communities “because they write good code”. I’ve suffered this directly, so have others I’m close to.
    - DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
      > Before codes of conduct, it was reasonably common for misogynistic men to get away with poor behaviour towards women in their communities “because they write good code”. And now they're just as misogynistic, but we don't get to enjoy their code. They're also hidden from view so it's less likely that someone is going to tell them to cut the crap and maybe re-evaluate their world-view. They've essentially been shoved into an echo chamber. In the end, arguing about code of conduct means arguing about the core ideas of free speech, one of them being: Do we want to segregate wrongdoers, or attempt to deal with them?
      - vertex-four 7y ago
        I honestly am not amazingly fussed about what we do with them overall as long as I don’t personally have to deal with them when trying to publish some code!
      - danaris 7y ago
        > And now they're just as misogynistic, but we don't get to enjoy their code. I'd rather get the code of all the women who were driven out of tech by their bigotry and hate than whatever they'd write, even if it was legendary golden code spewed forth from the fount of all wisdom.
        papermachete 7y ago
        So you have no place in the market with this destructive mindset.
      - username90 7y ago
        You don't miss it, when you drive out men they just go and start new projects or companies together where they can be themselves again.
- pdonis 7y ago
  This rosy vision depends on everyone being reasonable and using common sense and a presumption of good faith when applying the CoC. However, many of the people who are pushing for CoC in projects do not themselves meet these requirements.
- belorn 7y ago
  I participated and co-ran a gaming community for about 10 years, and whenever drama occurred we added whatever behavior triggered it to the rule list. It grew, and grew and grew into a very large CoC. By a few year into it people caused drama over the rules, people "lawyer" over them, they got enforced selectively, people accused each other of favor-ism, splits occurred and the community almost killed itself over the rules. When the game moved into a sequel we changed the rules. Now it says "Treat others with respect and courtesy", which don't really qualify as a CoC since its basically common sense. People see it as so obvious that it not even a rule, more of a guideline. This new rule has since then been pretty stable. It keeps out exactly those who can't behave but welcomes everyone else. There has not been a single instance of arguments about selective enforcement or favor-ism in terms to how the rules get enforced. My own experience from that seems very similar when people complain about CoC. Long CoC lists tend to create fear, uncertainty and doubt within the community. It creates tiers of people where different class of people get the rules enforced differently. This in turn create a deep seated distrust.
boffinism 7y ago
Could you possibly elaborate? To me CoCs seem like they'd be at best a good thing and at worst harmless. What do you think is wretched and insidious about them?
- dabbernaught420 7y ago
  At worst they can be used to restrict and exclude minority groups and to reinforce existing hierarchies (which are often unjustified).
- DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago
  While some codes of conduct boil down to "just be nice", sometimes they end up encoding very specific beliefs of the people writing them. For example, the code of conduct on dev.to [1] states that: ------------- We pledge to prioritize marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as 'leave me alone,' 'go away,' or 'I’m not discussing this with you.' Someone’s refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts Criticisms of racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions ------------- Note the "we will not act on complaints regarding [...] reverse racism". As someone who 100% disagrees with the idea that "reverse racism" is a thing (although I find the word dumb; it's just plain racism, nothing "reverse" about it) I have to ask myself: Does this mean the rules differ based on skin colour? Is something acceptable when said by a black user to a white user, but racism if it's the other way around? It's things like these that, I believe, end up turning a "code of conduct" into a de facto political manifesto designed to keep out not only unwanted behavior, but also unwanted world-views. It's those codes of conduct that create direct harm. [1] https://dev.to/code-of-conduct https://dev.to/code-of-conduct
andrewxdiamond 7y ago
I find that just being a normal, friendly person is enough to satisfy most, if not all CoCs. I've never had to read one, and I've never been in a situation where I was in violation of one.
- sergiotapia 7y ago
  same but that's not my point at all.
devnonymous 7y ago
> It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories. Replace text with code and think about how the supposed 'meritocracy' of open source deals with the problem? Isn't 'nobody is stopping you from forking it', 'submit a pull request', 'the community/bdfl has final say', not apply here as well? Or do the benefits of open collaboration stop at code?
- devnonymous 7y ago
  Here let me be even more clear for the downvoting-without-commenting cowards : > It's a wretched, insidious *code* sneaked in by very bad > actors into mainstream open source repositories. How would have OSS projects historically dealt with code pushed by someone, which was deemed detrimental/inferior to the overall intent and purpose of the software ? Isn't it the presumption that whatever gets absorbed / pulled in, reflects the consensus of the community involved and that the future of the project is determined by the sort of natural evolution ? ...the bazaar ? So, if the bazaar now puts value on CoCs ...you may either contribute or dissent and start up your own competing replacement. Isn't that the way it was supposed to work ?
  - username90 7y ago
    These people said they won't contribute to a project with a CoC, which is exactly what you say they should do. So what is the point of your post? They are already following your advice!
    - devnonymous 7y ago
      Umm no. Can you read threads in whatever client you are reading this on? The post I replied to said that they were put off by a CoC and alleged that this is being pushed by bad actors. My point was to say that the CoC exists in the repos because of the same reasons open source exists. Not because of insidious acts of bad actors.
jimnotgym 7y ago
I submit that all groups of people have a code of conduct. Not all groups write them down.
- codezero 7y ago
  Very good point. This is similar to the concept of company culture. Every company has one but not all make it explicit.

dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago

We won't. You can't force me to contribute to your project and if it has such a coc I just won't.

thundergolfer 7y ago
? I'm very confused. "coc" is a "Code of Conduct" document right? How is that you're opposed to CoC _in general_?
- dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
  Because reasonable people already know how to behave and don't need a document to tell them. I've never seen a case where a coc improved software.
  - voxl 7y ago
    The Rust compiler. There is your example.
    - dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
      What was happening that the coc helped with?
  - viraptor 7y ago
    And people "know" not to steal. Yet we need to have laws so we agree on rules and boundaries. You can think of it like a list of rules agreed on early, so the project leaders don't have to go through the arguments about what's accepted after someone crosses one person's boundaries, but not another's.
    - dbdjfjrjvebd 7y ago
      If someone steals from another project member or breaks other laws the police should be called.

DarkWiiPlayer 7y ago

Take a look, for example, at the "contributor covenant", which github endorses [1]. It lists as its first example of unacceptable behavior: > The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind This is a perfect example of rules that are simply too broad. Say I write a comment `//normalize file path because fuck windows`. I said fuck; does this count as "sexualized language"? Do I need to be banned over this? Also, a more "fun fact" example (from the same document): > Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people Did anybody consider that this is excluding psychopaths from the community based on a psychological condition? They are, by definition, unable to feel empathy. So much for inclusivity, I guess. [1] https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/ https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/

hacknat 7y ago
Why do you need to swear in the commit history? And if you do, why not write something more clever. Also, saying, “fuck” and referencing sex are not the same thing, ask any harassment attorney. The law isn’t some mystery, these Code of Conduct rules weren’t written in a vacuum. Why is everyone such a baby about maintaining a basic sense of decency on a public, sometimes cross-cultural, project? Seriously, harden the f up and sacrifice something fairly trivial for the good of the group.
- papermachete 7y ago
  The group? You mean the common denominator - they ought to grow thicker skin. The CoC is a ridiculously unnecessary and shallow piece of text made to make one transsexual famous.