7 ms·

GitHub Puts Open Code of Conduct on Pause

88 points by s_kilk 11y ago

thomasfoster96 11y ago
Looking through some of the issues on that repo, the amount of bad faith people have in the very idea of a code of conduct is astonishing. Not to mention the sheer ignorance of issues affecting minorities within the tech community (seriously, Jon Stewart could have had a weeks worth of material). Sure, the wording of the code of conduct wasn't perfect, but it'd be much nicer if people wanted to see it improved in good faith. There's a lot of ugly things that happen in open source projects, which aren't rosy as some may assume, and the idea that making more people feel welcomed and safe in communities like GitHub can't take precedent over the possibility that a few current contributors will find themselves outside the rules on a regular basis is very worrying.
- zxcvcxz 11y ago
  It seems like a lot of people are just upset because they feel the CoC discriminates against them. You are harassed and have privileges ? I don't care, being harassed is still not fine whether you have privileges or not. Seems to sum up what most people are complaining about.
  - thomasfoster96 11y ago
    Yeah, I agree that a few sections were worded badly (the thing about reverse-isms isn't really needed, and just raises more questions than it answers). it's just that a lot of people don't seem to have the patience or the good faith to see these sorts of issues fixed.
    - jp_sc 11y ago
      I agree, the maintainers could have merge one of the many pull request than removed the reverse -ism section, but apparently it was something they couldn't agree on.
  - drunkwally 11y ago
    Well, it's ok to discriminate against people with Commit Privileges - they can just bypass the whole pull request system anyway.
  - dmart 11y ago
    For the sake of discussion, this is the part that people seem to be taking the most issue with: Our open source community prioritizes 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” - Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts - Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial - Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions
    - zxcvcxz 11y ago
      How can people still deny that this isn't clear discrimination against straight white males? The PC police talk about all the "coded racism" that they see all day but they can't tell that this is coded racism? They should just say what they mean: If you're a straight white man it's okay to treat you like shit.
      - tomp 11y ago
        People who say that are usually people who define "racism" and "sexism" as "discrimination from a position of power" or "systemic/institutional discrimination". For them, just because men or whites are statistically more likely to be powerful, men and whites are powerful and "privileged" in general. Who cares about poor whites and homeless men! I think that's pure bullshit, but a lot of people apparently feel the opposite.
      - Globrazu 11y ago
        "They should just say what they mean: If you're a straight white man it's okay to treat you like shit." Several GitHub employees would agree: https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/pull/17 https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/pull/17 https://twitter.com/rachelmyers/status/629981737121021953 https://twitter.com/rachelmyers/status/629981737121021953 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/629080326736773120 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/629080326736773120 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/573560084837498880 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/573560084837498880
- intortus 11y ago
  It seems like the loudest voices are brand new accounts with some sort of anti-diversity agenda.
  - thomasfoster96 11y ago
    There's what looks like an obviously fake account (lots of 0-star repos with nonsense names) who just started arguing in an issue that privelige doesn't exist and that people are only lazy. That really doesn't help at all, and I'm kinda surprised that it seems as though people are trying to reason with people like that.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - tommorris 11y ago
    It's almost as if they might have magically appeared from 4chan or Reddit in order to troll or something...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - jlarocco 11y ago
    I don't know about the "anti-diversity agenda", but I would assume at least some of new accounts are from people who don't want to get their "real" account involved in a big political issue. Just being against the code of conduct doesn't make somebody a terrible person, but there are other people who would spin it that way.
  - 13thLetter 11y ago
    Unfortunately, in much of tech opposing the "diversity" advocates under your own name is a great way to get fired, or get a Twitter mob after you (which will then get you fired.) A lot of people understandably don't want to risk that.
- blfr 11y ago
  I agree with criticisms of the very idea of a code of conduct. Why is it astonishing? Documents like this enable the worst amateur Internet lawyering. If your parents, teachers, and local cops did not teach you how to conduct yourself, there's absolutely no way a text file will. On the other hand, it will be used to justify all kinds of unnecessary non-technical debates.
- anatoly 11y ago
  I think many people who criticize the idea feel that it's been heavily pre-politicized to push for a particular version of "social justice" meme-complex. And if you discount that driving force and that motivation, it isn't clear that a CoC is either needed or useful. If you try to think about it in a clean-slate way, sort of; forget "oppression", "microagressions against minorities" and all the other politicized jargon that the current version is peppered with, and ask yourself (answers are my opinions, obviously)... Q. Is there a problem with some open source communities being too hostile, unwelcoming, potentially harassing to many people? A. Yes. Some communities are clearly much more "nice" than others. Some are clearly much more welcoming of newbies, etc. Q. How does this "bad behavior" manifest itself, in actual open source communities? A. Mostly by how much rudeness and brusqueness some regulars of the community feel they can treat others with. If you hang around on forums, issues, IRC channels etc. enough you can get a clear feel of the "niceness meter". Sometimes there's also explicit misogyny, but that's relatively rare. Other explicit forms of hostility (e.g. racism, transmisogynism) are even rarer to nonexistent. It's simply that if the overall level of niceness is low, then people behave like assholes. Asshole-like behavior is easy to interpret as racism etc. Q. Is this a huge problem? Should we invest effort in trying to make communities more nice? A. I don't know, seems like a personal call. I personally like the nice and welcoming communities much more, and don't really see the point of being rude and hostile (I think it's counterproductive and not only wrong). Q. Is a code of conduct a way to achieve that? A. Doubt it. Seems like the norm set by the leaders of the community, together with a few clear examples of "we will not tolerate this kind of behavior", is how it's successfully done. Is there a project which went "not nice -> adopted CoC -> became clearly nicer"? I haven't seen any.
  - thomasfoster96 11y ago
    The difference between setting some community norms and having a code of conduct seems to be writing it down. And, in writing things down, there's one reference for the rules/guidelines and everyone knows what they are. Is much prefer GitHub to set some rules rather than have year's worth of what would essentially become case law. Plus, community norms aren't exactly working either, so.. Overall, with a bit of editing (perhaps the code of conduct should be rewritten to avoid as many politicised words as possible), I'm not sure where the difference is between a well written code of conduct and a 'be nice' community norm.
- jlarocco 11y ago
  I didn't know about this code of conduct until just now when I saw this article, so I don't know for sure why people are so against it. Part of the problem may be that there have a been a few high profile cases (posted to HN, etc.) where a bunch of people unrelated to a project (not committers, not forkers, not users) have come in and started big commotions over committer behavior outside of the project (i.e. on their personal twitter account having nothing to do with the project), or have demanded changes like "he" be replaced with "they" or "he/she" in the documentation. Basically, a bunch of political stuff that doesn't have perceived technical value for the project. It could be that a GitHub endorsed "code of conduct" would give those people more ammunition against projects, and I think that worries people. Most GitHub users aren't big OSS projects, they're just using it to host their hobby projects, they're not out to make political statements.
- return0 11y ago
  What about people who disagree and are not willing to follow the CoC? Is it preferable to turn some brilliant (but very ill-tempered; so many of them exist) mind away from a project because they are not our favourite? In the end, is it the software that matters or the 'community'?
  - johnny22 11y ago
    I've avoided software because of the community before. Usually there is some other equivalent software with a better community.
    - return0 11y ago
      I was referring to the CoC , not the community.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  Unfortunately, the well was poisoned from the beginning. Don't forget that this entire CoC fiasco started because someone barged into an open-source project demanding that a major contributor be ostracized because he said something on Twitter she didn't like. Anyone who sees that happen, and then sees that suddenly the same people who were demanding contributors be chucked out over Twitter arguments two weeks ago are now writing codes of conduct that are getting imposed everywhere, is not going to be inclined to read them in good faith.
_mikz 11y ago
GitHub ? Looks like TODO group are more companies than just GitHub [1]. [1] http://todogroup.org/members/ http://todogroup.org/members/
- Albright 11y ago
  Yeah, I was just gonna ask - what does this have to do with GitHub beyond being hosted there? But now I guess my question shifts to - what does it mean to be a "member" of this group? Is using any of the services provided by member companies binding me to that CoC somehow? EDIT: Ah, looks like there's answers in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10027561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10027561
stefantalpalaru 11y ago
> to protect people who are typically the target of harassment in open source So if you are subjected to an unusual type of harassment, you're on your own?
- tomp 11y ago
  I guess the idea is, to prevent (or at least discourage) the usual types of harassment up-front, and deal with the more unusual, rare forms on-the-fly as they appear.
  - bluecalm 11y ago
    Yet, there is specific point about "reverse-sexism" and "reverse -ism" not being considered a problem. The concerns are valid, the text is written with an agenda in mind and the agenda makes people weary.
- plonh 11y ago
  It is very tempting to question the motives of who believes a 0% solution is better than 55% first step.
  - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
    Those are the motives of somebody who believes that no policing at all is better than half-ass policing. We already have organizations that deal with illegal activities. We pay them for it and we give them a monopoly on violence, so why not use them instead of trying to replicate what they do, partially and poorly?
tomp 11y ago
I fail to see how this has anything to do with GitHub, except using GitHub as a hosting platform. Can somebody please change the title?
- millstone 11y ago
  GitHub is driving and adopting it: https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-condu...
- ForHackernews 11y ago
  Github recently adopted this Code of Conduct for all of their own-brand projects, and they were encouraging other open source projects to adopt it as well: https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-condu...
  - tomp 11y ago
    But the question is, are they also supporting/adopting this change/suspension? That's not clear from the linked post.
    - jp_sc 11y ago
      At least the GitHub's Atom and Electron projects are evaluating alternatives. See: https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206#issuecomment-128858335 https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206#issuecomment-128858...
- bbrazil 11y ago
  Looks like it's a group GitHub is a member of: http://todogroup.org/members/ http://todogroup.org/members/
- detaro 11y ago
  GitHub is part of the "todogroup".
anon3_ 11y ago
I group "Code of Conduct" with Political Correctness. For anyone interested in a good read on the subject, check out End of Discussion: How the Left's Outrage Industry Shuts Down Debate, Manipulates Voters, and Makes America Less Free (and Fun) by Mary Ham and Guy Benson. It's an excellent read, and shouldn't be too much of a sting to the social outrage panderers out there.
- sagichmal 11y ago
  > I set up my web browser to automatically change > "political correctness" to "treating people with > respect" https://twitter.com/byronclarknz/status/628702214391902208 https://twitter.com/byronclarknz/status/628702214391902208 If you use the phrase "social outrage" or "social justice" as a pejorative, you're part of the problem :)
  - rorykoehler 11y ago
    I was thinking of doing something similar as a chrome plugin to counter propaganda on mass media sites but I never got around to it. You've inspired me to bump that up the weekend project to-do list again
  - d9h549f34w6 11y ago
    What Person A sees as a good sort of social justice may not like up with Person B's interpretation. It is possible for movements to sully the name of a stated positive goal. Beware of reading books by their covers. That's the sort of thinking that got the US stuck with the Patriot Act or other sorts of legislation. Especially after a terrorist attack, people don't want to be opponents of "patriotism" (which gets defined by one side to mean a very specific thing).
  - tomp 11y ago
    Huh? "Outrage" is practically uniformly worse than other, "non-outrageous" ways of solving problems. Whenever the word "justice" is modified by another word, that's usually a very good sign that the expression doesn't mean justice.
  - 11y ago
toufka 11y ago
For those confused, here is the actual code of conduct [1] [1] http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/ http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/
nadams 11y ago
I feel like an open code of conduct is unnecessary. Really - the only thing you need to remember is - be nice to each other and be patient with those supplying advice and those who are asking for advice. (I have screenshots of discussions that violate this simple fundamental rule). I have flagged 40+ comments (that were accepted and acted upon) on stackoverflow alone of people just being stupid jerks. The SVN people did a great presentation about how to protect your project from poisonous people [1]. Their story goes is that someone came on the SVN mailing list ranting about how SVN sucks and doesn't have the features he wanted - according to the talk the SVN community was polite and the guy just went away. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM
- jameskilton 11y ago
  It shouldn't be necessary, but it is. We live in an age where if an action is not explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, because if it's not explicitly unacceptable, it's obviously acceptable. In short, if you don't say I can't abuse people, it's ok for me to abuse people. Oh, and these people will also happily throw around the "First Amendment" as justification, which makes me incredibly sad for the future of our nation. Solving that behavior though is incredibly difficult.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - tomp 11y ago
    > We live in an age where if an action is not explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, because if it's not explicitly unacceptable, it's obviously acceptable. I don't think this is a good argument, because you might as well say We live in an age where if an action is explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, to protest the very idea that it was made explicitly unacceptable.
  - curun1r 11y ago
    The reason they're unnecessary is that codes of conduct aren't legally enforceable and the resulting actions from violating them can be taken by the community regardless of whether they have a code of conduct. I agree with Bo Burnham when he said, "Who needs a thousand metaphors to realize you shouldn't be a dick?" [1] (or, in this case, a thousand prohibited behaviors) If someone does act in a way that is unacceptable, the community should, politely, explain to them that that sort of behavior isn't allowed and why it's not allowed, since often times people are communicating in a foreign language or are coming from a culture that has different norms. If the behavior persists, you take whatever action you would have taken had you had a code of conduct. Basically, there's no practical need for legal-level detail in a code of conduct, just use, "don't be a jerk." [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxc20saM8DA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxc20saM8DA (audio NSFW)
josteink 11y ago
That's the smartest thing they've done all week. Now it's time to bury it dead. This is a solution looking for a problem (tm). The only thing this code of conduct does beside state the obvious (behave like adults) is the implied distrust expressed by introducing it in the first place: that without being nannied into proper behaviour, we would all act like vile animals. Generally I find such nannying deeply offensive.
- voltagex_ 11y ago
  Why? Edit: you edited that comment from a single line since I posted this. To elaborate: I think that codes of conduct can be very very useful, especially in resolving disputes or setting community standards. I don't think it's driven out of distrust. High profile harassment on GitHub is not good for GitHub, or the open source community as a whole.
  - return0 11y ago
    So is github trying to become the defacto community leader of all open source software? I was under the impression there are many different teams in there that had different standards. Does open source even need a universal nanny? Isnt the idea of free software completely opposite to this? It would make sense if github did this in response to persistent issues with the community, but by doing it pre-emptively it seems like they have ambitions to become some kind of worldwide coordinator.
    - johnny22 11y ago
      an opt-in code of conduct per project doesn't seem to be universal nannying
      - return0 11y ago
        Oops i didn't know it was opt-in. Although with github recommending it it will become the defacto code, and it's likely to be mandatory a few years down the road.
- 11y ago
zxcvcxz 11y ago
>Physical contact and simulated physical contact (eg, textual descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without consent or after a request to stop. [violates the code of conduct] I can't tell if this is a joke or not.
- voltagex_ 11y ago
  Stuff like that doesn't belong on an issue tracker, whether it's invited or not. Bring back the mailing lists.
  - UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
    > Bring back the mailing lists. Huh? So you both support the CoC but also want to "bring back" a form of communication which is entirely unmoderated? That's super contradictory.
    - voltagex_ 11y ago
      I should have been more explicit. A GitHub issue is for discussing a problem or idea for a particular repository. Hugs, virtual or otherwise seem to be completely tangential. Also, a mailing list can be one of the most strictly moderated forms of communication.
- plonh 11y ago
  In an employment environment, that is clearcut sexual harassment. The OCC is bringing some of that professionalism to open source communities. Why would it be a joke to ban annoying personally-targeted behaviors that are unrelated to the work product? I can't think of a case where discussing cuddling someone is appropriate for a Pull Request, mailing list, or IRC chat
  - zxcvcxz 11y ago
    hugs plonh
    - 11y ago
bluecalm 11y ago
It is terribly worded and quite off-putting. It also has a lot of stuff in it which could be summed up as "be a decent person". Saved space could be used to express specific ideas about desired behavior. Some comments: Offensive comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neuro(a)typicality, physical appearance, body size, race, age, regional discrimination, political or religious affiliation Both too general and too specific. If the goal is to say offensive comments are not permitted then leave it at: "offensive comments". If comments regarding things on the list should be avoided say it. I mean, what about "comments about sexual orientation, mental illnesses etc. of other project members are not permitted". Why is political affiliation on the list I don't really know either. Political affiliation or religion might be completely off-topic for open source projects but putting them in the same list as race/age/body size/physical appearance/gender etc. makes very little sense. Just don't talk about politics or religion if they are unrelated to the project. Don't talk about diet ideas either when we are at that. Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment "Don't make personal attacks and avoid personal remarks in general". Deliberate misgendering Already covered in "comments about gender/sexual orientation/mental ilnesses/etc. of other members". Physical contact and simulated physical contact (eg, textual descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without consent or after a request to stop It really doesn't seem to be necessary and makes the whole thing sound not very serious. Threats of violence, both physical and psychological Incitement of violence towards any individual, including encouraging a person to commit suicide or to engage in self-harm Deliberate intimidation Yeah but make it shorter: "Threats of violence, intimidation or encouraging them". Deliberate “outing” of any aspect of a person’s identity without their consent except as necessary to protect others from intentional abuse Actual problem and specific behavior hidden among 20 or so points which could be shortened to 3. More points like that please. Publication of non-harassing private communication Another good point: specific behavior which isn't universally understood as undesired and should be specifically included in CoC. ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ Reverse sexism is sexism. Remove all "reverse" non-sense. The whole text reads like mumbling on Tumblr. Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts Yeah, refusal to explain or debate recent fruit diet should be included as well. Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions All this is covered in point about sexism and discrimination. Cissexist or cisgender aren't actual words in a dictionary and should be avoided in an international CoC. If someone has been harmed or offended, it is our responsibility to listen carefully and respectfully, and do our best to right the wrong. This is nonsense. Someone being harmed is a serious issue. Someone being offended - not so much. Mixing the two takes away from serious issues and dilute them in ocean of meaningless words without any specific behaviors attached to them. Although this list cannot be exhaustive, we explicitly honor diversity in age, gender, gender identity or expression, culture, ethnicity, language, national origin, political beliefs, profession, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and technical ability. Blablablabla, 3rd time in the same text. Just remove the whole section. It doesn't contribute anything. If you experience or witness unacceptable behavior—or have any other concerns—please report it by contacting us via abuse@todogroup.org. All reports will be handled with discretion. In your report please include: "If you experience unacceptable behavior or have any questions, contact us at abuse@todogroup.org. All reports will be handled with discretion." The rest of the paragraph is pointless. Overall it's a terribly written text which is thin on specifics and repeats itself several times. Maybe ask an actual technical writer to put things together. Make it shorter as well.
arihant 11y ago
This is probably a parallel, but I still think Apple came up with the best, most self-disciplining code of conduct of all times: > We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it". And we think that you will also know it when you cross it. Yes, they do publish more direct rejection reasons too. But those reasons were enumerated by experience and were repeated over and over -- like religious hate. What I like is they did not start with a committee of people saying, "Let's brainstorm what could go wrong." To be able to deal with a large fraternity of people, the better approach is to not imagine a nominal case. You have to start openly, then establish a nominal case with experience. Mark Stehlik once said, "But, you don't make policies around edge cases; you make policies for the nominal case and deal with the edge cases as the exceptions they are." I like this because this enforces a clear intention of being able to deal with edge cases. This is just like Apple's review guidelines. Firstly, they call it guidelines and not code of conduct. That enforces that they are human and flexible. The problem with having a code of conduct with a large fraternity of people is that you immediately give the community an intent of what you like and what you don't like. That discourages you to find things that you may have liked but now will never get to see. That also gives idiots in a community a chance to police potential talent based on now written code of conduct. That's a grammar-nazi behavior. You may get great English teachers in that community, but I doubt a Hemingway would want anything to do with you. Also, it has to be unique to each project. Having a blanket open source code of conduct is bad. It follows what you know, and discourages what you don't. So it's essentially an inbreeding system. And if an open source project accepts and celebrates an inbreeding system, then it is just a proprietary company with no money and wget-able code, essentially failing on both ends.
- tomp 11y ago
  The problem with blank statements such as this is that "the line" is a moving goalpost. I'd (reluctantly) support even completely arbitrary enforcement, as long as it's not retroactive. But if they first accept apps with Confederate flag, and then ban them later, that's IMO a very bad precedent.
  - 11y ago
xiaoma 11y ago
Github really has jumped the shark.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  Not yet. They will when they'll impose that silly CoC on all hosted projects.
skarap 11y ago
This is a gem: "Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes"
ehvatum 11y ago
This section of the "code of conduct" is extremely odd without some context: > Our open source community prioritizes 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” > Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts > Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial > Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions I'd put this in the context of: * normal people are political and can not understand a technological meritocracy * the percentage of the github community that is black is much smaller than the percentage of the worldwide or even US population that is black * the github community is a technological meritocracy and the problem of underrepresentation is external * not understanding this, normal people would like to impose a political solution, and the form this solution takes is grotesque and offensive to people who do understand meritocracy
- josteink 11y ago
  You may have missed the memo, but according to new wave feminism, the word "meritocracy" represents discrimination because you don't give special treatment to people based on sex, ethnicity etc. I'm not kidding, and Github had adopted this view as well. [1] Among many, this CoC is seen as a continuation of this largely feminist agenda. And we don't think it belong here. Open source I'd apolitical, meaning you can avoid political issues entirely in a good and neutral environment. Why work so hard to make it political? For what gains? [1] http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Meritocracy is sexist because it's bullshit. We know it's bullshit from the resumé experiments or the blinded orchestra auditions etc.
    - josteink 11y ago
      So your argument is that because it's hard (impossible?) to achieve a true meritocracy the term and goal itself is "bullshit" and should be dismissed? Should we apply the same standards to other common things? Equality? Democracy? Justice? See how that works? Yeah, it doesn't. Your argument is a non-argument.
Globrazu 11y ago
The reason so many people are against “Code of Conducts” is because they are not used as a baseline for professional behavior (against which there would also be arguments in Open Source), but as a political cudgel to score points and enact things like: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... See also: http://dancerscode.com/blog/why-the-open-code-of-conduct-isnt-for-me/ http://dancerscode.com/blog/why-the-open-code-of-conduct-isn... But look at some instances for people who have tried to win political arguments by invoking CoC or are lobbying to instate them on Open Source projects. Here is a case, someone from Italy was openly against reassignment surgery for kids on Twitter: https://twitter.com/krainboltgreene/status/611569515315507200 https://twitter.com/krainboltgreene/status/61156951531550720... Uh-oh my wrong-think senses are tingling, he had a different opinion on a social issue on his private Twitter account. How could this possibly be handled? Ignore him, discuss this issue with him or agree to disagree? No, clearly he must be somehow punished for this. Luckily he is apparently contributor to an Open Source project called Opal, so let’s bring it up there and insist: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 This is fortunately brought up by someone who has already developed their own “Code of Conduct” that would require that it be followed on “public spaces” (like Twitter, Facebook or forums) and if not be removed from the project: http://contributor-covenant.org/ http://contributor-covenant.org/ http://where.coraline.codes/coraline_ehmke.pdf http://where.coraline.codes/coraline_ehmke.pdf “By adopting this Code of Conduct, project maintainers commit themselves to fairly and consistently applying these principles to every aspect of managing this project. Project maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct may be permanently removed from the project team. This code of conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces when an individual is representing the project or its community.” It’s basically a shakedown game for ideological control of a space and seems to work this way: 1) Someone gets offended by something someone in the Open Source community said (usually on Twitter or at an official event), they demand they be removed or otherwise punished for the offending thing. 2) They flood GitHub or similar with demands to remove said individual and/or at least adopt a “Code of Conduct” to prevent such “despicable” behavior like disagreeing in the future, which includes all Social media and official events 3) Once project creators have been socially shamed as some sort of bigots for not wanting to do anything against this sufficiently and the activists got a foot in the door they push a self-formulated “Code of Conduct” on the project like above 4) Then they demand it be upheld and anyone that says anything they deem offensive be removed from the project, if it happens another time they can point to said “Code of Conduct” and ask the project creators to abide. A “safe space” has been created. After this they don’t particularly give a shit if great software engineers get pushed out for disagreeing or the project even fails beyond this point, because said people don’t want to abide by their ideology. Meritocracy is also generally a trigger-word for these people, they absolutely hate it. Just bring it up in conversation and they reveal themselves and their intentions rather quickly: http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-dehumanizing-myth-of-the-meritocracy https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-dehumanizing-myth-of... Another recent issue was GitHub removing a WebM Converter repo because it used the word “retards”, you can see the same individual involved in the first Twitter conflict pop up throughout the comments yelling at other people to leave: https://github.com/nixxquality/WebMConverter/commit/c1ac0baac06fa7175677a4a1bf65860a84708d67 https://github.com/nixxquality/WebMConverter/commit/c1ac0baa...

88 points by s_kilk 11y ago

Looking through some of the issues on that repo, the amount of bad faith people have in the very idea of a code of conduct is astonishing. Not to mention the sheer ignorance of issues affecting minorities within the tech community (seriously, Jon Stewart could have had a weeks worth of material). Sure, the wording of the code of conduct wasn't perfect, but it'd be much nicer if people wanted to see it improved in good faith. There's a lot of ugly things that happen in open source projects, which aren't rosy as some may assume, and the idea that making more people feel welcomed and safe in communities like GitHub can't take precedent over the possibility that a few current contributors will find themselves outside the rules on a regular basis is very worrying.

zxcvcxz 11y ago
It seems like a lot of people are just upset because they feel the CoC discriminates against them. You are harassed and have privileges ? I don't care, being harassed is still not fine whether you have privileges or not. Seems to sum up what most people are complaining about.
- thomasfoster96 11y ago
  Yeah, I agree that a few sections were worded badly (the thing about reverse-isms isn't really needed, and just raises more questions than it answers). it's just that a lot of people don't seem to have the patience or the good faith to see these sorts of issues fixed.
  - jp_sc 11y ago
    I agree, the maintainers could have merge one of the many pull request than removed the reverse -ism section, but apparently it was something they couldn't agree on.
- drunkwally 11y ago
  Well, it's ok to discriminate against people with Commit Privileges - they can just bypass the whole pull request system anyway.
- dmart 11y ago
  For the sake of discussion, this is the part that people seem to be taking the most issue with: Our open source community prioritizes 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” - Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts - Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial - Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions
  - zxcvcxz 11y ago
    How can people still deny that this isn't clear discrimination against straight white males? The PC police talk about all the "coded racism" that they see all day but they can't tell that this is coded racism? They should just say what they mean: If you're a straight white man it's okay to treat you like shit.
    - tomp 11y ago
      People who say that are usually people who define "racism" and "sexism" as "discrimination from a position of power" or "systemic/institutional discrimination". For them, just because men or whites are statistically more likely to be powerful, men and whites are powerful and "privileged" in general. Who cares about poor whites and homeless men! I think that's pure bullshit, but a lot of people apparently feel the opposite.
    - Globrazu 11y ago
      "They should just say what they mean: If you're a straight white man it's okay to treat you like shit." Several GitHub employees would agree: https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/pull/17 https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/pull/17 https://twitter.com/rachelmyers/status/629981737121021953 https://twitter.com/rachelmyers/status/629981737121021953 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/629080326736773120 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/629080326736773120 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/573560084837498880 https://twitter.com/agelender/status/573560084837498880
intortus 11y ago
It seems like the loudest voices are brand new accounts with some sort of anti-diversity agenda.
- thomasfoster96 11y ago
  There's what looks like an obviously fake account (lots of 0-star repos with nonsense names) who just started arguing in an issue that privelige doesn't exist and that people are only lazy. That really doesn't help at all, and I'm kinda surprised that it seems as though people are trying to reason with people like that.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- tommorris 11y ago
  It's almost as if they might have magically appeared from 4chan or Reddit in order to troll or something...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- jlarocco 11y ago
  I don't know about the "anti-diversity agenda", but I would assume at least some of new accounts are from people who don't want to get their "real" account involved in a big political issue. Just being against the code of conduct doesn't make somebody a terrible person, but there are other people who would spin it that way.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  Unfortunately, in much of tech opposing the "diversity" advocates under your own name is a great way to get fired, or get a Twitter mob after you (which will then get you fired.) A lot of people understandably don't want to risk that.
blfr 11y ago
I agree with criticisms of the very idea of a code of conduct. Why is it astonishing? Documents like this enable the worst amateur Internet lawyering. If your parents, teachers, and local cops did not teach you how to conduct yourself, there's absolutely no way a text file will. On the other hand, it will be used to justify all kinds of unnecessary non-technical debates.
anatoly 11y ago
I think many people who criticize the idea feel that it's been heavily pre-politicized to push for a particular version of "social justice" meme-complex. And if you discount that driving force and that motivation, it isn't clear that a CoC is either needed or useful. If you try to think about it in a clean-slate way, sort of; forget "oppression", "microagressions against minorities" and all the other politicized jargon that the current version is peppered with, and ask yourself (answers are my opinions, obviously)... Q. Is there a problem with some open source communities being too hostile, unwelcoming, potentially harassing to many people? A. Yes. Some communities are clearly much more "nice" than others. Some are clearly much more welcoming of newbies, etc. Q. How does this "bad behavior" manifest itself, in actual open source communities? A. Mostly by how much rudeness and brusqueness some regulars of the community feel they can treat others with. If you hang around on forums, issues, IRC channels etc. enough you can get a clear feel of the "niceness meter". Sometimes there's also explicit misogyny, but that's relatively rare. Other explicit forms of hostility (e.g. racism, transmisogynism) are even rarer to nonexistent. It's simply that if the overall level of niceness is low, then people behave like assholes. Asshole-like behavior is easy to interpret as racism etc. Q. Is this a huge problem? Should we invest effort in trying to make communities more nice? A. I don't know, seems like a personal call. I personally like the nice and welcoming communities much more, and don't really see the point of being rude and hostile (I think it's counterproductive and not only wrong). Q. Is a code of conduct a way to achieve that? A. Doubt it. Seems like the norm set by the leaders of the community, together with a few clear examples of "we will not tolerate this kind of behavior", is how it's successfully done. Is there a project which went "not nice -> adopted CoC -> became clearly nicer"? I haven't seen any.
- thomasfoster96 11y ago
  The difference between setting some community norms and having a code of conduct seems to be writing it down. And, in writing things down, there's one reference for the rules/guidelines and everyone knows what they are. Is much prefer GitHub to set some rules rather than have year's worth of what would essentially become case law. Plus, community norms aren't exactly working either, so.. Overall, with a bit of editing (perhaps the code of conduct should be rewritten to avoid as many politicised words as possible), I'm not sure where the difference is between a well written code of conduct and a 'be nice' community norm.
jlarocco 11y ago
I didn't know about this code of conduct until just now when I saw this article, so I don't know for sure why people are so against it. Part of the problem may be that there have a been a few high profile cases (posted to HN, etc.) where a bunch of people unrelated to a project (not committers, not forkers, not users) have come in and started big commotions over committer behavior outside of the project (i.e. on their personal twitter account having nothing to do with the project), or have demanded changes like "he" be replaced with "they" or "he/she" in the documentation. Basically, a bunch of political stuff that doesn't have perceived technical value for the project. It could be that a GitHub endorsed "code of conduct" would give those people more ammunition against projects, and I think that worries people. Most GitHub users aren't big OSS projects, they're just using it to host their hobby projects, they're not out to make political statements.
return0 11y ago
What about people who disagree and are not willing to follow the CoC? Is it preferable to turn some brilliant (but very ill-tempered; so many of them exist) mind away from a project because they are not our favourite? In the end, is it the software that matters or the 'community'?
- johnny22 11y ago
  I've avoided software because of the community before. Usually there is some other equivalent software with a better community.
  - return0 11y ago
    I was referring to the CoC , not the community.
13thLetter 11y ago
Unfortunately, the well was poisoned from the beginning. Don't forget that this entire CoC fiasco started because someone barged into an open-source project demanding that a major contributor be ostracized because he said something on Twitter she didn't like. Anyone who sees that happen, and then sees that suddenly the same people who were demanding contributors be chucked out over Twitter arguments two weeks ago are now writing codes of conduct that are getting imposed everywhere, is not going to be inclined to read them in good faith.

_mikz 11y ago

GitHub ? Looks like TODO group are more companies than just GitHub [1]. [1] http://todogroup.org/members/ http://todogroup.org/members/

Albright 11y ago
Yeah, I was just gonna ask - what does this have to do with GitHub beyond being hosted there? But now I guess my question shifts to - what does it mean to be a "member" of this group? Is using any of the services provided by member companies binding me to that CoC somehow? EDIT: Ah, looks like there's answers in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10027561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10027561

stefantalpalaru 11y ago

> to protect people who are typically the target of harassment in open source So if you are subjected to an unusual type of harassment, you're on your own?

tomp 11y ago
I guess the idea is, to prevent (or at least discourage) the usual types of harassment up-front, and deal with the more unusual, rare forms on-the-fly as they appear.
- bluecalm 11y ago
  Yet, there is specific point about "reverse-sexism" and "reverse -ism" not being considered a problem. The concerns are valid, the text is written with an agenda in mind and the agenda makes people weary.
plonh 11y ago
It is very tempting to question the motives of who believes a 0% solution is better than 55% first step.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  Those are the motives of somebody who believes that no policing at all is better than half-ass policing. We already have organizations that deal with illegal activities. We pay them for it and we give them a monopoly on violence, so why not use them instead of trying to replicate what they do, partially and poorly?

tomp 11y ago

I fail to see how this has anything to do with GitHub, except using GitHub as a hosting platform. Can somebody please change the title?

millstone 11y ago
GitHub is driving and adopting it: https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-condu...
ForHackernews 11y ago
Github recently adopted this Code of Conduct for all of their own-brand projects, and they were encouraging other open source projects to adopt it as well: https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-condu...
- tomp 11y ago
  But the question is, are they also supporting/adopting this change/suspension? That's not clear from the linked post.
  - jp_sc 11y ago
    At least the GitHub's Atom and Electron projects are evaluating alternatives. See: https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206#issuecomment-128858335 https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206#issuecomment-128858...
bbrazil 11y ago
Looks like it's a group GitHub is a member of: http://todogroup.org/members/ http://todogroup.org/members/
detaro 11y ago
GitHub is part of the "todogroup".

anon3_ 11y ago

I group "Code of Conduct" with Political Correctness. For anyone interested in a good read on the subject, check out End of Discussion: How the Left's Outrage Industry Shuts Down Debate, Manipulates Voters, and Makes America Less Free (and Fun) by Mary Ham and Guy Benson. It's an excellent read, and shouldn't be too much of a sting to the social outrage panderers out there.

sagichmal 11y ago
> I set up my web browser to automatically change > "political correctness" to "treating people with > respect" https://twitter.com/byronclarknz/status/628702214391902208 https://twitter.com/byronclarknz/status/628702214391902208 If you use the phrase "social outrage" or "social justice" as a pejorative, you're part of the problem :)
- rorykoehler 11y ago
  I was thinking of doing something similar as a chrome plugin to counter propaganda on mass media sites but I never got around to it. You've inspired me to bump that up the weekend project to-do list again
- d9h549f34w6 11y ago
  What Person A sees as a good sort of social justice may not like up with Person B's interpretation. It is possible for movements to sully the name of a stated positive goal. Beware of reading books by their covers. That's the sort of thinking that got the US stuck with the Patriot Act or other sorts of legislation. Especially after a terrorist attack, people don't want to be opponents of "patriotism" (which gets defined by one side to mean a very specific thing).
- tomp 11y ago
  Huh? "Outrage" is practically uniformly worse than other, "non-outrageous" ways of solving problems. Whenever the word "justice" is modified by another word, that's usually a very good sign that the expression doesn't mean justice.
- 11y ago

toufka 11y ago

For those confused, here is the actual code of conduct [1] [1] http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/ http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/

nadams 11y ago

I feel like an open code of conduct is unnecessary. Really - the only thing you need to remember is - be nice to each other and be patient with those supplying advice and those who are asking for advice. (I have screenshots of discussions that violate this simple fundamental rule). I have flagged 40+ comments (that were accepted and acted upon) on stackoverflow alone of people just being stupid jerks. The SVN people did a great presentation about how to protect your project from poisonous people [1]. Their story goes is that someone came on the SVN mailing list ranting about how SVN sucks and doesn't have the features he wanted - according to the talk the SVN community was polite and the guy just went away. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM

jameskilton 11y ago
It shouldn't be necessary, but it is. We live in an age where if an action is not explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, because if it's not explicitly unacceptable, it's obviously acceptable. In short, if you don't say I can't abuse people, it's ok for me to abuse people. Oh, and these people will also happily throw around the "First Amendment" as justification, which makes me incredibly sad for the future of our nation. Solving that behavior though is incredibly difficult.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- tomp 11y ago
  > We live in an age where if an action is not explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, because if it's not explicitly unacceptable, it's obviously acceptable. I don't think this is a good argument, because you might as well say We live in an age where if an action is explicitly called out as unacceptable, a significant number of people will perform said action, to protest the very idea that it was made explicitly unacceptable.
- curun1r 11y ago
  The reason they're unnecessary is that codes of conduct aren't legally enforceable and the resulting actions from violating them can be taken by the community regardless of whether they have a code of conduct. I agree with Bo Burnham when he said, "Who needs a thousand metaphors to realize you shouldn't be a dick?" [1] (or, in this case, a thousand prohibited behaviors) If someone does act in a way that is unacceptable, the community should, politely, explain to them that that sort of behavior isn't allowed and why it's not allowed, since often times people are communicating in a foreign language or are coming from a culture that has different norms. If the behavior persists, you take whatever action you would have taken had you had a code of conduct. Basically, there's no practical need for legal-level detail in a code of conduct, just use, "don't be a jerk." [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxc20saM8DA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxc20saM8DA (audio NSFW)

josteink 11y ago

That's the smartest thing they've done all week. Now it's time to bury it dead. This is a solution looking for a problem (tm). The only thing this code of conduct does beside state the obvious (behave like adults) is the implied distrust expressed by introducing it in the first place: that without being nannied into proper behaviour, we would all act like vile animals. Generally I find such nannying deeply offensive.

voltagex_ 11y ago
Why? Edit: you edited that comment from a single line since I posted this. To elaborate: I think that codes of conduct can be very very useful, especially in resolving disputes or setting community standards. I don't think it's driven out of distrust. High profile harassment on GitHub is not good for GitHub, or the open source community as a whole.
- return0 11y ago
  So is github trying to become the defacto community leader of all open source software? I was under the impression there are many different teams in there that had different standards. Does open source even need a universal nanny? Isnt the idea of free software completely opposite to this? It would make sense if github did this in response to persistent issues with the community, but by doing it pre-emptively it seems like they have ambitions to become some kind of worldwide coordinator.
  - johnny22 11y ago
    an opt-in code of conduct per project doesn't seem to be universal nannying
    - return0 11y ago
      Oops i didn't know it was opt-in. Although with github recommending it it will become the defacto code, and it's likely to be mandatory a few years down the road.
11y ago

zxcvcxz 11y ago

>Physical contact and simulated physical contact (eg, textual descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without consent or after a request to stop. [violates the code of conduct] I can't tell if this is a joke or not.

voltagex_ 11y ago
Stuff like that doesn't belong on an issue tracker, whether it's invited or not. Bring back the mailing lists.
- UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
  > Bring back the mailing lists. Huh? So you both support the CoC but also want to "bring back" a form of communication which is entirely unmoderated? That's super contradictory.
  - voltagex_ 11y ago
    I should have been more explicit. A GitHub issue is for discussing a problem or idea for a particular repository. Hugs, virtual or otherwise seem to be completely tangential. Also, a mailing list can be one of the most strictly moderated forms of communication.
plonh 11y ago
In an employment environment, that is clearcut sexual harassment. The OCC is bringing some of that professionalism to open source communities. Why would it be a joke to ban annoying personally-targeted behaviors that are unrelated to the work product? I can't think of a case where discussing cuddling someone is appropriate for a Pull Request, mailing list, or IRC chat
- zxcvcxz 11y ago
  hugs plonh
  - 11y ago

bluecalm 11y ago

It is terribly worded and quite off-putting. It also has a lot of stuff in it which could be summed up as "be a decent person". Saved space could be used to express specific ideas about desired behavior. Some comments: Offensive comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neuro(a)typicality, physical appearance, body size, race, age, regional discrimination, political or religious affiliation Both too general and too specific. If the goal is to say offensive comments are not permitted then leave it at: "offensive comments". If comments regarding things on the list should be avoided say it. I mean, what about "comments about sexual orientation, mental illnesses etc. of other project members are not permitted". Why is political affiliation on the list I don't really know either. Political affiliation or religion might be completely off-topic for open source projects but putting them in the same list as race/age/body size/physical appearance/gender etc. makes very little sense. Just don't talk about politics or religion if they are unrelated to the project. Don't talk about diet ideas either when we are at that. Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment "Don't make personal attacks and avoid personal remarks in general". Deliberate misgendering Already covered in "comments about gender/sexual orientation/mental ilnesses/etc. of other members". Physical contact and simulated physical contact (eg, textual descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without consent or after a request to stop It really doesn't seem to be necessary and makes the whole thing sound not very serious. Threats of violence, both physical and psychological Incitement of violence towards any individual, including encouraging a person to commit suicide or to engage in self-harm Deliberate intimidation Yeah but make it shorter: "Threats of violence, intimidation or encouraging them". Deliberate “outing” of any aspect of a person’s identity without their consent except as necessary to protect others from intentional abuse Actual problem and specific behavior hidden among 20 or so points which could be shortened to 3. More points like that please. Publication of non-harassing private communication Another good point: specific behavior which isn't universally understood as undesired and should be specifically included in CoC. ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ Reverse sexism is sexism. Remove all "reverse" non-sense. The whole text reads like mumbling on Tumblr. Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts Yeah, refusal to explain or debate recent fruit diet should be included as well. Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions All this is covered in point about sexism and discrimination. Cissexist or cisgender aren't actual words in a dictionary and should be avoided in an international CoC. If someone has been harmed or offended, it is our responsibility to listen carefully and respectfully, and do our best to right the wrong. This is nonsense. Someone being harmed is a serious issue. Someone being offended - not so much. Mixing the two takes away from serious issues and dilute them in ocean of meaningless words without any specific behaviors attached to them. Although this list cannot be exhaustive, we explicitly honor diversity in age, gender, gender identity or expression, culture, ethnicity, language, national origin, political beliefs, profession, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and technical ability. Blablablabla, 3rd time in the same text. Just remove the whole section. It doesn't contribute anything. If you experience or witness unacceptable behavior—or have any other concerns—please report it by contacting us via abuse@todogroup.org. All reports will be handled with discretion. In your report please include: "If you experience unacceptable behavior or have any questions, contact us at abuse@todogroup.org. All reports will be handled with discretion." The rest of the paragraph is pointless. Overall it's a terribly written text which is thin on specifics and repeats itself several times. Maybe ask an actual technical writer to put things together. Make it shorter as well.

arihant 11y ago

This is probably a parallel, but I still think Apple came up with the best, most self-disciplining code of conduct of all times: > We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it". And we think that you will also know it when you cross it. Yes, they do publish more direct rejection reasons too. But those reasons were enumerated by experience and were repeated over and over -- like religious hate. What I like is they did not start with a committee of people saying, "Let's brainstorm what could go wrong." To be able to deal with a large fraternity of people, the better approach is to not imagine a nominal case. You have to start openly, then establish a nominal case with experience. Mark Stehlik once said, "But, you don't make policies around edge cases; you make policies for the nominal case and deal with the edge cases as the exceptions they are." I like this because this enforces a clear intention of being able to deal with edge cases. This is just like Apple's review guidelines. Firstly, they call it guidelines and not code of conduct. That enforces that they are human and flexible. The problem with having a code of conduct with a large fraternity of people is that you immediately give the community an intent of what you like and what you don't like. That discourages you to find things that you may have liked but now will never get to see. That also gives idiots in a community a chance to police potential talent based on now written code of conduct. That's a grammar-nazi behavior. You may get great English teachers in that community, but I doubt a Hemingway would want anything to do with you. Also, it has to be unique to each project. Having a blanket open source code of conduct is bad. It follows what you know, and discourages what you don't. So it's essentially an inbreeding system. And if an open source project accepts and celebrates an inbreeding system, then it is just a proprietary company with no money and wget-able code, essentially failing on both ends.

tomp 11y ago
The problem with blank statements such as this is that "the line" is a moving goalpost. I'd (reluctantly) support even completely arbitrary enforcement, as long as it's not retroactive. But if they first accept apps with Confederate flag, and then ban them later, that's IMO a very bad precedent.
- 11y ago

xiaoma 11y ago

Github really has jumped the shark.

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
Not yet. They will when they'll impose that silly CoC on all hosted projects.

skarap 11y ago

This is a gem: "Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes"

ehvatum 11y ago

This section of the "code of conduct" is extremely odd without some context: > Our open source community prioritizes 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” > Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts > Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial > Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions I'd put this in the context of: * normal people are political and can not understand a technological meritocracy * the percentage of the github community that is black is much smaller than the percentage of the worldwide or even US population that is black * the github community is a technological meritocracy and the problem of underrepresentation is external * not understanding this, normal people would like to impose a political solution, and the form this solution takes is grotesque and offensive to people who do understand meritocracy

josteink 11y ago
You may have missed the memo, but according to new wave feminism, the word "meritocracy" represents discrimination because you don't give special treatment to people based on sex, ethnicity etc. I'm not kidding, and Github had adopted this view as well. [1] Among many, this CoC is seen as a continuation of this largely feminist agenda. And we don't think it belong here. Open source I'd apolitical, meaning you can avoid political issues entirely in a good and neutral environment. Why work so hard to make it political? For what gains? [1] http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug
- DanBC 11y ago
  Meritocracy is sexist because it's bullshit. We know it's bullshit from the resumé experiments or the blinded orchestra auditions etc.
  - josteink 11y ago
    So your argument is that because it's hard (impossible?) to achieve a true meritocracy the term and goal itself is "bullshit" and should be dismissed? Should we apply the same standards to other common things? Equality? Democracy? Justice? See how that works? Yeah, it doesn't. Your argument is a non-argument.

Globrazu 11y ago

The reason so many people are against “Code of Conducts” is because they are not used as a baseline for professional behavior (against which there would also be arguments in Open Source), but as a political cudgel to score points and enact things like: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... See also: http://dancerscode.com/blog/why-the-open-code-of-conduct-isnt-for-me/ http://dancerscode.com/blog/why-the-open-code-of-conduct-isn... But look at some instances for people who have tried to win political arguments by invoking CoC or are lobbying to instate them on Open Source projects. Here is a case, someone from Italy was openly against reassignment surgery for kids on Twitter: https://twitter.com/krainboltgreene/status/611569515315507200 https://twitter.com/krainboltgreene/status/61156951531550720... Uh-oh my wrong-think senses are tingling, he had a different opinion on a social issue on his private Twitter account. How could this possibly be handled? Ignore him, discuss this issue with him or agree to disagree? No, clearly he must be somehow punished for this. Luckily he is apparently contributor to an Open Source project called Opal, so let’s bring it up there and insist: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 This is fortunately brought up by someone who has already developed their own “Code of Conduct” that would require that it be followed on “public spaces” (like Twitter, Facebook or forums) and if not be removed from the project: http://contributor-covenant.org/ http://contributor-covenant.org/ http://where.coraline.codes/coraline_ehmke.pdf http://where.coraline.codes/coraline_ehmke.pdf “By adopting this Code of Conduct, project maintainers commit themselves to fairly and consistently applying these principles to every aspect of managing this project. Project maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct may be permanently removed from the project team. This code of conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces when an individual is representing the project or its community.” It’s basically a shakedown game for ideological control of a space and seems to work this way: 1) Someone gets offended by something someone in the Open Source community said (usually on Twitter or at an official event), they demand they be removed or otherwise punished for the offending thing. 2) They flood GitHub or similar with demands to remove said individual and/or at least adopt a “Code of Conduct” to prevent such “despicable” behavior like disagreeing in the future, which includes all Social media and official events 3) Once project creators have been socially shamed as some sort of bigots for not wanting to do anything against this sufficiently and the activists got a foot in the door they push a self-formulated “Code of Conduct” on the project like above 4) Then they demand it be upheld and anyone that says anything they deem offensive be removed from the project, if it happens another time they can point to said “Code of Conduct” and ask the project creators to abide. A “safe space” has been created. After this they don’t particularly give a shit if great software engineers get pushed out for disagreeing or the project even fails beyond this point, because said people don’t want to abide by their ideology. Meritocracy is also generally a trigger-word for these people, they absolutely hate it. Just bring it up in conversation and they reveal themselves and their intentions rather quickly: http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-dehumanizing-myth-of-the-meritocracy https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-dehumanizing-myth-of... Another recent issue was GitHub removing a WebM Converter repo because it used the word “retards”, you can see the same individual involved in the first Twitter conflict pop up throughout the comments yelling at other people to leave: https://github.com/nixxquality/WebMConverter/commit/c1ac0baac06fa7175677a4a1bf65860a84708d67 https://github.com/nixxquality/WebMConverter/commit/c1ac0baa...