5 ms·

Sure. The person who started promoting the concept of code of conducts, "Coraline Ada", has been hunting down people who violate their view of what's "right". F

Sure. The person who started promoting the concept of code of conducts, "Coraline Ada", has been hunting down people who violate their view of what's "right". For example pressuring third party projects to remove maintainers because they are "publicly calling trans people out" on twitter. https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 There is this other very interesting example where Coraline got called out doing the very things she despises: https://github.com/ContributorCovenant/contributor_covenant/issues/278 https://github.com/ContributorCovenant/contributor_covenant/... This is of course perfectly acceptable.

SorryImNone 10y ago
She's "GitHub staff" now. The mentality of "that person said something I disagree with [on other media] and they should be banned here [on a random project that I don't have anything to do with] or else..." is incredible toxic. If you don't agree with "assholes" writing code or using code that was written by an "asshole", you'll have a hard time using anything open source at all.
- tokenizerrr 10y ago
  Yup! And your project can be removed/banned from GitHub if you do something she disagrees with now. I forget which project it was that was lashed out at recently, but it's all rather insane.
  - adekok 10y ago
    That is, it looks like GitHub will ignore it's own code of conduct in order to punish "bad" people. This is a common theme among proponents of codes of conduct. See also Twitter's ban on many people, including Milo Yiannopoulos. He was banned for "violating the rules". But I've looked, and no one anywhere can point out which exact tweet violated which particular rule. Even more extreme, no one can point out where he said any of things he's accused of saying. So... Twitter blocked him for "abuse", when there is zero evidence of such abuse. I'll say this: The more extreme the code of conduct, the more likely it will be broken by the people enforcing it.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      Neither Github nor Twitter have a code of conduct; they have a Terms of Service document. TOS, unlike CoCs, are written by lawyers because the goal is a full-featured CYA. And they generally contain the legalesed disclaimer "we're free to get rid of you whenever we feel like, for whatever reason we feel like". I'm sure twitter also has some extra community rules somewhere. CoCs are worrisome because they tend to emulate that behaviour, and I certainly do not condone overreaching TOS, but you can't equate those two situations. It's the behaviour of people vs. the behaviour of companies.
      - adekok 10y ago
        Except in the case of Twitter, the claim was that they banned Milo for engaging in certain kinds of behavior. Such claims are false. When you have such a legalese disclaimer as above, you don't need to lie about why you're banning someone. You just say "Under the Twitter ToS, we've banned Milo." The fact that they chose to lie about the justification for the ban shows not only that the ban was politically motivated (and not based on reality), but that they are so incompetent that they can't even spin it in their favor. Their bias is leaking. They don't really care about their own ToS. They don't care about following the rules they put in. They do care about banning anyone who they don't like. I find such behavior unethical, and morally repugnant.
        scrollaway 10y ago
        What does any of this have to do with codes of conduct in open source?
        adekok 10y ago
        The "Code of Conduct" discussion is about a larger social issue. CoCs in open source projects are just one facet. As others have posted here, some people pushing "codes of conduct in open source" end up violating those codes themselves, and abusing their authority. These people do this not only in open source forums, but in other places, too. The underlying topic then, cannot be about the CoC. In reality, the topic being discussed is who gets to control the conversation. Along with that, who gets to decide what topics are acceptable. Not just which topics are OK for a list / forum, but which topics are "good think", and which ones are "bad think". The question for someone running an open source project, then, is will your project be taken over by people who are pushing a particular ideological agenda, and who are using your project to do so? My answer is "No.". Perhaps "over my dead body" is more accurate.
- alex_hitchins 10y ago
  More reasons to look at GitLab, cloud or self hosted. You should be the only one who decides who works with you on your project. I have cancelled all my private repos with GitHub as I just don't like their ethics.
- jcadam 10y ago
  Yep, that person being hired on at Github was the last straw for me. I cancelled my (paid) subscription and moved all my private repos to Gitlab. Any future open source libraries I may publish will be on Gitlab as well.
biafra 10y ago
As far as I can tell, the Opal project does not have a CoC so this is a bad example for "witch hunting based on CoC".
- tokenizerrr 10y ago
  Because the Opal project is ran by sensible maintainers. The point of this link is to showcase the kind of people that want CoCs to be a thing. If you read the comments on that issue you will see that the PC warriors are trying to pressure the project into adopting a CoC which would make the behavior that upset them unacceptable. To be clear, the behavior that upset them was a contributor tweeting things on twitter under his private name. They wanted this person to be removed from the open source projects they were working on because of that. The people who are pushing CoCs want to be able to punish people for perceived injustices. These injustices can be tweeting on twitter, and if the PC warriors get their way the punishment is to be ostracized from all open source projects.
- AlexB138 10y ago
  If you read the link, you'll see that one of the people conducting the witch-hunt created an issue calling for a CoC. It's a good example of the mentality and its link to CoCs.: "strand referenced this issue on Jun 18, 2015 Closed Create a Code of Conduct #942"
dvdhnt 10y ago
That's insane. I can't believe that conversation exists on that place. It is not the place for it. Personally, I believe to each their own, but I also believe in not harassing people when they don't agree with me.
- wolfgke 10y ago
  > That's insane. I can't believe that conversation exists on that place. Even worse: "Coraline Ada" works for GitHub (also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13667829 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13667829).
jdiez17 10y ago
Reading this thread is making my blood boil. But I have never understood what these people are trying to prevent. Are they concerned about someone's technical contribution to a project being rejected because of their personal views? I have never seen that happen (and I don't believe it has ever happened). Yet, the person who created this issue has been hunting down people whose opinions they don't agree with and trying to exclude them from participating in a technical community. The scariest part: this person works for GitHub.

SorryImNone 10y ago

She's "GitHub staff" now. The mentality of "that person said something I disagree with [on other media] and they should be banned here [on a random project that I don't have anything to do with] or else..." is incredible toxic. If you don't agree with "assholes" writing code or using code that was written by an "asshole", you'll have a hard time using anything open source at all.

tokenizerrr 10y ago
Yup! And your project can be removed/banned from GitHub if you do something she disagrees with now. I forget which project it was that was lashed out at recently, but it's all rather insane.
- adekok 10y ago
  That is, it looks like GitHub will ignore it's own code of conduct in order to punish "bad" people. This is a common theme among proponents of codes of conduct. See also Twitter's ban on many people, including Milo Yiannopoulos. He was banned for "violating the rules". But I've looked, and no one anywhere can point out which exact tweet violated which particular rule. Even more extreme, no one can point out where he said any of things he's accused of saying. So... Twitter blocked him for "abuse", when there is zero evidence of such abuse. I'll say this: The more extreme the code of conduct, the more likely it will be broken by the people enforcing it.
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    Neither Github nor Twitter have a code of conduct; they have a Terms of Service document. TOS, unlike CoCs, are written by lawyers because the goal is a full-featured CYA. And they generally contain the legalesed disclaimer "we're free to get rid of you whenever we feel like, for whatever reason we feel like". I'm sure twitter also has some extra community rules somewhere. CoCs are worrisome because they tend to emulate that behaviour, and I certainly do not condone overreaching TOS, but you can't equate those two situations. It's the behaviour of people vs. the behaviour of companies.
    - adekok 10y ago
      Except in the case of Twitter, the claim was that they banned Milo for engaging in certain kinds of behavior. Such claims are false. When you have such a legalese disclaimer as above, you don't need to lie about why you're banning someone. You just say "Under the Twitter ToS, we've banned Milo." The fact that they chose to lie about the justification for the ban shows not only that the ban was politically motivated (and not based on reality), but that they are so incompetent that they can't even spin it in their favor. Their bias is leaking. They don't really care about their own ToS. They don't care about following the rules they put in. They do care about banning anyone who they don't like. I find such behavior unethical, and morally repugnant.
      - scrollaway 10y ago
        What does any of this have to do with codes of conduct in open source?
        adekok 10y ago
        The "Code of Conduct" discussion is about a larger social issue. CoCs in open source projects are just one facet. As others have posted here, some people pushing "codes of conduct in open source" end up violating those codes themselves, and abusing their authority. These people do this not only in open source forums, but in other places, too. The underlying topic then, cannot be about the CoC. In reality, the topic being discussed is who gets to control the conversation. Along with that, who gets to decide what topics are acceptable. Not just which topics are OK for a list / forum, but which topics are "good think", and which ones are "bad think". The question for someone running an open source project, then, is will your project be taken over by people who are pushing a particular ideological agenda, and who are using your project to do so? My answer is "No.". Perhaps "over my dead body" is more accurate.
alex_hitchins 10y ago
More reasons to look at GitLab, cloud or self hosted. You should be the only one who decides who works with you on your project. I have cancelled all my private repos with GitHub as I just don't like their ethics.
jcadam 10y ago
Yep, that person being hired on at Github was the last straw for me. I cancelled my (paid) subscription and moved all my private repos to Gitlab. Any future open source libraries I may publish will be on Gitlab as well.

biafra 10y ago

As far as I can tell, the Opal project does not have a CoC so this is a bad example for "witch hunting based on CoC".

tokenizerrr 10y ago
Because the Opal project is ran by sensible maintainers. The point of this link is to showcase the kind of people that want CoCs to be a thing. If you read the comments on that issue you will see that the PC warriors are trying to pressure the project into adopting a CoC which would make the behavior that upset them unacceptable. To be clear, the behavior that upset them was a contributor tweeting things on twitter under his private name. They wanted this person to be removed from the open source projects they were working on because of that. The people who are pushing CoCs want to be able to punish people for perceived injustices. These injustices can be tweeting on twitter, and if the PC warriors get their way the punishment is to be ostracized from all open source projects.
AlexB138 10y ago
If you read the link, you'll see that one of the people conducting the witch-hunt created an issue calling for a CoC. It's a good example of the mentality and its link to CoCs.: "strand referenced this issue on Jun 18, 2015 Closed Create a Code of Conduct #942"

dvdhnt 10y ago

That's insane. I can't believe that conversation exists on that place. It is not the place for it. Personally, I believe to each their own, but I also believe in not harassing people when they don't agree with me.

wolfgke 10y ago
> That's insane. I can't believe that conversation exists on that place. Even worse: "Coraline Ada" works for GitHub (also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13667829 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13667829).

jdiez17 10y ago

Reading this thread is making my blood boil. But I have never understood what these people are trying to prevent. Are they concerned about someone's technical contribution to a project being rejected because of their personal views? I have never seen that happen (and I don't believe it has ever happened). Yet, the person who created this issue has been hunting down people whose opinions they don't agree with and trying to exclude them from participating in a technical community. The scariest part: this person works for GitHub.