6 ms·

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 sh

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.

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.