5 ms·

I see, but this is still a political issue. Maybe a lot of minorities people just voted "no" in that survey question. Because.. why excluding people based on t

• matthewmacleod 9y ago
  You’ve described something that isn’t happening and won’t happen.
• awestroke 9y ago
  Discrimination, noun: > the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Is it unjust to make sure people from a minority do not feel alienated?
  • jhasse 9y ago
    Yes, you should instead make sure everyone doesn't feel alienated, not only the people from a minority regarding their race, age or sex.
    • Rusky 9y ago
      That... does seem to be the goal.
      • staticassertion 9y ago
        No no no, you see, by making minorities safer we must then be making the majority feel less safe! Safety is a zero sum game after all.
        • zkomp 9y ago
          In this minefield, I really miss the irony tag here. I do, really do, belive this should just boil down to: - don't be a jerk - don't discriminate
        • kbenson 9y ago
          It upsets me that the reason this joke plays so well is because we can see how this kind of thinking has become common in the world. Take your upvote, but know you've also made me sad. :/
          • zbraniecki 9y ago
            exactly. I also gave them my sad upvote for a really spot on commentary on the diversity and inclusion issues. :(
        • littlestymaar 9y ago
          > Safety is a zero sum game after all. That's what we thought before Rust came, that you could only have safety if you sacrificied speed. But now we know it was wrong ;)
      • jhasse 9y ago
        I wasn't talking about Rust, but wanted to give a direct answer to "Is it unjust to make sure people from a minority do not feel alienated?".
  • swfsql 9y ago
    then this brings a discussion on what "just" is. Does just implies impartiality? if so, different treatment by color would not be just, from what I can understand. Secondly, one can't be sure that others won't feel alienated. You just put them in a different classification. I would definitely tend to feel alienated..
  • xedrac 9y ago
    Is it just to alienate the majority to encourage the minority? A lot of companies promoting "diversity" certainly think so.
    • webkike 9y ago
      The rust team isn't alienating anyone
• andrewflnr 9y ago
  There is a difference between "including" and "not excluding" people based on color or whatever. It's (officially, anyway) about removing barriers, not roping people in. I'll grant in practice it's a blurry line. So, yeah, it's a political issue, but an open source project is necessarily a political entity by virtue of being made of people. You can't escape making political decisions, and since "inclusivity" mostly just means being nice to people, I can't complain much.
  • swfsql 9y ago
    I completely agree, and I'd like to add that if one is "not excluding", asking for color skin should be forbidden. Because knowing color skin cannot possibly help one to "not exclude". In other words, "not excluding" implies not asking for color skins.
    • andrewflnr 9y ago
      Eh, depending on the circumstances it might help you measure how well your anti-exclusion efforts are going. You'd definitely prefer it to be anonymous, and unlinked to any kind of entry process, including informal ones.
      • swfsql 9y ago
        This is correct. I mistakenly assumed that if they wanted to know about it, then they wanted to change something according to it, which may not be the case. They have talks, documentation is awesome, examples may even run online, ide stuff is cool, In my opinion, it hard to be more welcoming than that, and special treatment based on any individual traits (except for "what OS you're using" and stuff) would not only be unneeded, but also should be repelled ([subjective] personal value).