6 ms·

Replying to a flagged/deleted comment from "nukeop": > From the man who brought you "The Case for Non-Binary Genders" last year. No thanks. Link for the lazy:

Replying to a flagged/deleted comment from "nukeop": > From the man who brought you "The Case for Non-Binary Genders" last year. No thanks. Link for the lazy: https://ticki.github.io/blog/the-case-for-non-binary-genders/ https://ticki.github.io/blog/the-case-for-non-binary-genders... While this comment may not be directly "productive", I think the immediate response to it, and in general response to the topic at hand is rather instructive. It shows a general negativity (on both sides) which is obviously detracting from the positive energy and enthusiasm associated with (and often crucial for) sustainable open-source software projects. For all the good various diversity-initiatives has intended to do, I must admit I've yet to see any proof that these actually work and give the promised results. It's their claim and thus their responsibility to prove. Faced with constant reminders (like this) of how they keep causing toxic debates, which again and again causes people to leave (or avoid joining), it's easy to assume that right now these well intended initiatives, executed as they are, represent a net negative. Let's not make FOSS a matter of gender-identities and diversity, but again focus on the product, the commits, the code and the incremental improvements. Towards reaching a common goal, together. We should all focus on the good things which are uniting instead of letting a select few try to force a divisive agenda top-down upon a audience we know will give a mixed reception. Let's not kill something good with something well-meant, but misguided.

nukeop 9y ago
I don't think there ever was a single person that changed their mind after reading a misguided moralistic sermon. Common sense dictates that the topics of software development and identity politics do not overlap at all, but there are groups that try to, against overwhelming pushback, use one to gain control over the other in bizarre and puzzling ways. Every time somebody forces a "code of conduct" on a project that was doing very well without it, lots of talented developers leave, and, I imagine, an angel cries.
- Majestic121 9y ago
  You're the one forcing identity politics into this thread, by digging up a one year old unrelated article. I actually agree with you when you say that software development and identity politic don't overlap. So please, practice what you preach and stop trying to bring identity politics on an interesting subject about OSS and perfectionism.
  - VLM 9y ago
    The linked article is about the author actively changing their identity from FOSS dev to math researcher, and commenting about their identity of perfectionism. Entirely a commentary on the noun of identity, nothing on the verb of performing their identity. Chrome word search finds 77 instances of the capital letter "I" followed by space. Its harder to search on verbs, the word "Do " appears 8 times but mostly in comments. The subject of the post and discussion is personal identity, not personal actions or philosophy of action or whatever. It seems fair to bring up the OPs other identity posts, on the topics of politics or sexuality or whatever. The post is an interesting mix of personal diary and social status signalling.
montyf 9y ago
Let's be honest here, "non-binary genders" is a weird concept to begin with. It's alien, and doesn't apply to humans. Why is this whacko stuff getting shoved down our throats, and what does it have to do with programming? Do programmers think they are aliens or above human biology? Seriously though, I agree with the other comment about having Codes of Conduct. Don't programmers know what constitutes acceptable behavior? (Apart from stuff like not showering). Seriously though, great comment.
- Wingwing 9y ago
  > Don't programmers know what constitutes acceptable behavior? (Apart from stuff like not showering). Judging by your first paragraph: very much no.
- robotbikes 9y ago
  There are a lot of weird things associated with the counter-cultural ideas that helped spawn FOSS. To suggest that people can't or shouldn't advocate for acceptance of their conceptual identity is pretty misguided. On the other hand everything shouldn't be turned into some kind of litmus test. I saw nothing at all confrontational in that writing on non-binary genders and in general think that people would be cool with someone deciding that they identify themselves however. But getting back to the topic on hand, I remember reading about TFS and I thought wow this is really ambitious I wonder who will have the time to actually develop it. Evidently the author of said spec agreed. I do appreciate perfectionist programmers as I definitely tend towards hacking away to solve problems even if I chip the paint so to speak.
  - montyf 9y ago
    > To suggest that people can't or shouldn't advocate for acceptance of their conceptual identity is pretty misguided. I'm sorry, but made-up genders simply do not find their way into my model of the world. I never encounter such people in real life (hopefully they've all been siphoned off to Portland by now) and I simply do not have the time or the energy to so much as blink at such whacko ideas, much less accommodate the crazies by building special bathrooms just for them and their delusions. So sorry, but I will never "accept" this into any personal framework and will treat people like normal people with real genders, not made-up ones.
vertex-four 9y ago
Should we accept the status quo in all cases because somebody might speak up in upset? The diversity initiatives in the Rust community are one of the primary reasons I attempt to stay part of it, file bug reports, fix code, and attend conferences, in a way that I don't in communities which appear divided over whether or not it's socially acceptable to harass me based on my gender and/or medical history. You're suggesting that it's better that we allow people to continue harassing people over things that have literally nothing to do with their ability to code, than that people feel comfortable enough to code on your project - that it's more important to make racists, sexist, and other bigots comfortable than their victims. That's your call, but to call it "uniting" is complete nonsense.
- josteink 9y ago
  > You're suggesting that it's better that we allow people to continue harassing people over things that have literally nothing to do with their ability to code I don't. That's you misrepresenting my point of view. I've yet to contribute to a project which holds a COC, still I've yet to see any kind of harassament or abuse based on the ethnicity, sex, religious view or age of other contributors. In fact these things have not not ever been a subject. The subject was always the code. My opinion is that we focus on the code, the commits and not who wrote them. Simple as that. Why construe that as me supporting abuse? Yes, that means that if a trans "woman of colour" (or whatever is PC to write these days) submits a bad patch I should be able openly criticize it the same way I would criticize it as if it was written by a straight, white male. And how would I know that? Why should I even be expected to know that in the first place? I'm also against using a disproportionate amount of energy on explicitly focusing on these things which we all agree should not matter. Many of these diversity initiatives do exactly this, and when they do, that's just utterly detracting to the task at hand: crafting good software together. So my opinion is that these things are counter-productive and misguided, and my point is that I've yet to see any proof that I am wrong in holding that opinion. I think that's simple and clear enough, without the need to read any ulterior motives into it. Edit: Clarifications. Examples.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
mijoharas 9y ago
To be honest, I've never understood how people can see a code of conduct as being a divisive agenda. Every one I've seen has been strongly in favour of inclusivity.
- josteink 9y ago
  I've seen numerous examples of such documents codifying that it's completely OK to indulge in both sexism and racism if the person on the receiving end belongs to the wrong race, sex or has the wrong sexual orientation. I find it hard to support such initiatives. And again: It detracts from what should be the focus: code.
  - mijoharas 9y ago
    Could you cite one of these? It's not something I've ever seen.
    - josteink 9y ago
      TODOGroup's OpenCOC[1] would be the most prominent example: > Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: 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’" So if someone white or asian, straight or "regular" gay, of regular sex, or whatever are explicitly excluded from a community initiative and someone finds that objectionable, their COC says that kind of racism and sexism is OK. > Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts If you have problem with such principles, that's also not acceptable to discuss. Hardly a healthy environment for open debate. I think more people need to acknowledge that these COCs are 1. Controversial as opposed to universal. Trying to frame it as universal, and then excluding anyone who disagrees with that, just shows that it by definition is the opposite of inclusive. 2. The noise generated from the above controversy is detracting from other work on the project. IMO such measures should be avoided at all cost, as far as possible, especially considering how most FOSS projects are healthy, an that in most cases controversy like this is not needed and will do more harm than good. [1] http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/ http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/
mkirklions 9y ago
>Faced with constant reminders (like this) of how they keep causing toxic debates I kinda agree. Instead of solving the problem, it only digs worse.
dang 9y ago
Copying a trollish comment that was rightly flag-killed for breaking the site guidelines is a terrible thing to do in an HN thread, nor did you need to to make your point. It's a wonder this didn't revert to a tire fire; normally it would have. Please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

nukeop 9y ago

I don't think there ever was a single person that changed their mind after reading a misguided moralistic sermon. Common sense dictates that the topics of software development and identity politics do not overlap at all, but there are groups that try to, against overwhelming pushback, use one to gain control over the other in bizarre and puzzling ways. Every time somebody forces a "code of conduct" on a project that was doing very well without it, lots of talented developers leave, and, I imagine, an angel cries.

Majestic121 9y ago
You're the one forcing identity politics into this thread, by digging up a one year old unrelated article. I actually agree with you when you say that software development and identity politic don't overlap. So please, practice what you preach and stop trying to bring identity politics on an interesting subject about OSS and perfectionism.
- VLM 9y ago
  The linked article is about the author actively changing their identity from FOSS dev to math researcher, and commenting about their identity of perfectionism. Entirely a commentary on the noun of identity, nothing on the verb of performing their identity. Chrome word search finds 77 instances of the capital letter "I" followed by space. Its harder to search on verbs, the word "Do " appears 8 times but mostly in comments. The subject of the post and discussion is personal identity, not personal actions or philosophy of action or whatever. It seems fair to bring up the OPs other identity posts, on the topics of politics or sexuality or whatever. The post is an interesting mix of personal diary and social status signalling.

montyf 9y ago

Let's be honest here, "non-binary genders" is a weird concept to begin with. It's alien, and doesn't apply to humans. Why is this whacko stuff getting shoved down our throats, and what does it have to do with programming? Do programmers think they are aliens or above human biology? Seriously though, I agree with the other comment about having Codes of Conduct. Don't programmers know what constitutes acceptable behavior? (Apart from stuff like not showering). Seriously though, great comment.

Wingwing 9y ago
> Don't programmers know what constitutes acceptable behavior? (Apart from stuff like not showering). Judging by your first paragraph: very much no.
robotbikes 9y ago
There are a lot of weird things associated with the counter-cultural ideas that helped spawn FOSS. To suggest that people can't or shouldn't advocate for acceptance of their conceptual identity is pretty misguided. On the other hand everything shouldn't be turned into some kind of litmus test. I saw nothing at all confrontational in that writing on non-binary genders and in general think that people would be cool with someone deciding that they identify themselves however. But getting back to the topic on hand, I remember reading about TFS and I thought wow this is really ambitious I wonder who will have the time to actually develop it. Evidently the author of said spec agreed. I do appreciate perfectionist programmers as I definitely tend towards hacking away to solve problems even if I chip the paint so to speak.
- montyf 9y ago
  > To suggest that people can't or shouldn't advocate for acceptance of their conceptual identity is pretty misguided. I'm sorry, but made-up genders simply do not find their way into my model of the world. I never encounter such people in real life (hopefully they've all been siphoned off to Portland by now) and I simply do not have the time or the energy to so much as blink at such whacko ideas, much less accommodate the crazies by building special bathrooms just for them and their delusions. So sorry, but I will never "accept" this into any personal framework and will treat people like normal people with real genders, not made-up ones.

vertex-four 9y ago

Should we accept the status quo in all cases because somebody might speak up in upset? The diversity initiatives in the Rust community are one of the primary reasons I attempt to stay part of it, file bug reports, fix code, and attend conferences, in a way that I don't in communities which appear divided over whether or not it's socially acceptable to harass me based on my gender and/or medical history. You're suggesting that it's better that we allow people to continue harassing people over things that have literally nothing to do with their ability to code, than that people feel comfortable enough to code on your project - that it's more important to make racists, sexist, and other bigots comfortable than their victims. That's your call, but to call it "uniting" is complete nonsense.

josteink 9y ago
> You're suggesting that it's better that we allow people to continue harassing people over things that have literally nothing to do with their ability to code I don't. That's you misrepresenting my point of view. I've yet to contribute to a project which holds a COC, still I've yet to see any kind of harassament or abuse based on the ethnicity, sex, religious view or age of other contributors. In fact these things have not not ever been a subject. The subject was always the code. My opinion is that we focus on the code, the commits and not who wrote them. Simple as that. Why construe that as me supporting abuse? Yes, that means that if a trans "woman of colour" (or whatever is PC to write these days) submits a bad patch I should be able openly criticize it the same way I would criticize it as if it was written by a straight, white male. And how would I know that? Why should I even be expected to know that in the first place? I'm also against using a disproportionate amount of energy on explicitly focusing on these things which we all agree should not matter. Many of these diversity initiatives do exactly this, and when they do, that's just utterly detracting to the task at hand: crafting good software together. So my opinion is that these things are counter-productive and misguided, and my point is that I've yet to see any proof that I am wrong in holding that opinion. I think that's simple and clear enough, without the need to read any ulterior motives into it. Edit: Clarifications. Examples.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

mijoharas 9y ago

To be honest, I've never understood how people can see a code of conduct as being a divisive agenda. Every one I've seen has been strongly in favour of inclusivity.

josteink 9y ago
I've seen numerous examples of such documents codifying that it's completely OK to indulge in both sexism and racism if the person on the receiving end belongs to the wrong race, sex or has the wrong sexual orientation. I find it hard to support such initiatives. And again: It detracts from what should be the focus: code.
- mijoharas 9y ago
  Could you cite one of these? It's not something I've ever seen.
  - josteink 9y ago
    TODOGroup's OpenCOC[1] would be the most prominent example: > Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: 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’" So if someone white or asian, straight or "regular" gay, of regular sex, or whatever are explicitly excluded from a community initiative and someone finds that objectionable, their COC says that kind of racism and sexism is OK. > Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts If you have problem with such principles, that's also not acceptable to discuss. Hardly a healthy environment for open debate. I think more people need to acknowledge that these COCs are 1. Controversial as opposed to universal. Trying to frame it as universal, and then excluding anyone who disagrees with that, just shows that it by definition is the opposite of inclusive. 2. The noise generated from the above controversy is detracting from other work on the project. IMO such measures should be avoided at all cost, as far as possible, especially considering how most FOSS projects are healthy, an that in most cases controversy like this is not needed and will do more harm than good. [1] http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/ http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/

mkirklions 9y ago

>Faced with constant reminders (like this) of how they keep causing toxic debates I kinda agree. Instead of solving the problem, it only digs worse.

dang 9y ago

Copying a trollish comment that was rightly flag-killed for breaking the site guidelines is a terrible thing to do in an HN thread, nor did you need to to make your point. It's a wonder this didn't revert to a tire fire; normally it would have. Please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html