5 ms·
This section of the "code of conduct" is extremely odd without some context: > Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileg
by 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 agoYou 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 agoMeritocracy is sexist because it's bullshit. We know it's bullshit from the resumé experiments or the blinded orchestra auditions etc.
- josteink 11y agoSo 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.
- DanBC 11y agoNo, my argument is that people who claim to be operating a meritocracy need to be aware of a bunch of biases or they risk being sexist[1] whilst also dismissing any accusations of sexism. [1] etc
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- maxerickson 11y agoTo me that section reads like the person who wrote it recently had an encounter with a sea lion.