Your comments are either a tautology (projects are based on ideas), or very likely to be wrong (engineering projects should also include social values). e.g.

Your comments are either a tautology (projects are based on ideas), or very likely to be wrong (engineering projects should also include social values). e.g. > ... an ideological choice as the decision that the values should include inclusiveness I explained why this is not just unnecessary, but also why it's wrong on a much more fundamental level. When I get patches from people, I don't care what's under their clothes. I don't care what their political opinions are. I don't care what religion (or not) they belong to. I evaluate the patch based on it's engineering merits. I give them a review of the engineering work that they did, without reference to any of the above mentioned issues. It's absolutely inclusive, in a way that perhaps you don't understand. It doesn't pervert the project by demanding that members adhere to a particular ideology. I find naive attempts at "inclusiveness" to be repugnant. They are a back-door way of leveraging such "niceties" into taking over the group, and establishing an ideology-driven totalitarian dictatorship with Orwellian overtones. And no, I'm not exaggerating here. Look at any number of groups which started out as goal oriented, and devolved into fights over ideological correctness. Very soon, the arguments over ideology overwhelm the group, and everyone who gets things done... leaves. What's left is the ideology-driven politicians, who then find out that they're in their an echo chamber. They turn on each other, and the group dies a flaming death. See Atheism+ for a good example of this in recent years.