4 ms·

> Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? If a code of conduct hurts your feelings that much maybe you're just not cut out for collab

> Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? If a code of conduct hurts your feelings that much maybe you're just not cut out for collaborative work. This is a personal attack, very thinly veiled. If Hacker News had the same code of conduct, your account would have to be banned at worst.

Certhas 8y ago
That's fair, it's definitely a way to read this. I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like. I'll edit it. Edit: Too late, I can't edit anymore unfortunately. Let me rephrase: "Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It's work that anyone who wants to work in a collaborative project can reasonably be expected to do. If this is objectionable to you, then maybe this collaboration isn't for you."
- zeroname 8y ago
  > Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It can be quite hard to live up to everyone's standards of "decency". You just failed to do it. > I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like. Write that on the chalkboard one hundred times and maybe we'll let it slide. This time.
  - Certhas 8y ago
    Yeah, I was called out on it, and I corrected myself. I wouldn't want to be part of a project that bans people who make an effort towards decency. The fact that standards differ and a consensus needs to be found for what constitutes decency is not an argument against it. What point are you trying to illustrate? Are you saying I shouldn't have been called out on it? Because I disagree. The fact was, I found the post I replied to annoying, and I replied in a tone that was stronger than it needed to be. It's a good thing that was called out. Next time I'll take a breather before replying and we'll have a more constructive exchange.
    - Sacho 8y ago
      I believe they were trying to refute your initial point: > Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? By pointing out that you weren't able to live up to that standard even when trying to champion it. How hard will it be if you're in a heated argument with someone when your work is at stake?
      - Certhas 8y ago
        Thanks. I don't know, this is the topic I get most heated about, I successfully lead pretty diverse teams, this definitely wouldn't happen to me in that context. After all discussion message boards like this are also a different context than a professional mailing list (and I strongly believe that context is important and not always appropriately taken into account). Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. So I'd stand by my assessment. It isn't that hard. I expect it of myself and my team. I still sometimes fail. Then a CoC, being called out on it, and given constructive criticism helps me.
        zeroname 8y ago
        > Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. So I'd stand by my assessment. It isn't that hard. I expect it of myself and my team. I still sometimes fail. Then a CoC, being called out on it, and given constructive criticism helps me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(psychology)#Disintegration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(psychology)#Disintegr...
        kaneua 8y ago
        > Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. Code of Conduct that you are defending doesn't mention it. It allows to state someone guilty right after first "slip up". Now I can take your comments and present them to the pretty diverse teams you successfully lead and you may be expelled from them due to your heated arguments on HN. But I wouldn't do that. I'm just making an example how exploitable Contrubutor Covenant's policies are.
DanBC 8y ago
Hacker News does have a code of conduct, and the comment was flagged.

Certhas 8y ago

That's fair, it's definitely a way to read this. I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like. I'll edit it. Edit: Too late, I can't edit anymore unfortunately. Let me rephrase: "Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It's work that anyone who wants to work in a collaborative project can reasonably be expected to do. If this is objectionable to you, then maybe this collaboration isn't for you."

zeroname 8y ago
> Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It can be quite hard to live up to everyone's standards of "decency". You just failed to do it. > I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like. Write that on the chalkboard one hundred times and maybe we'll let it slide. This time.
- Certhas 8y ago
  Yeah, I was called out on it, and I corrected myself. I wouldn't want to be part of a project that bans people who make an effort towards decency. The fact that standards differ and a consensus needs to be found for what constitutes decency is not an argument against it. What point are you trying to illustrate? Are you saying I shouldn't have been called out on it? Because I disagree. The fact was, I found the post I replied to annoying, and I replied in a tone that was stronger than it needed to be. It's a good thing that was called out. Next time I'll take a breather before replying and we'll have a more constructive exchange.
  - Sacho 8y ago
    I believe they were trying to refute your initial point: > Because behaving like a decent human being is that hard, isn't it? By pointing out that you weren't able to live up to that standard even when trying to champion it. How hard will it be if you're in a heated argument with someone when your work is at stake?
    - Certhas 8y ago
      Thanks. I don't know, this is the topic I get most heated about, I successfully lead pretty diverse teams, this definitely wouldn't happen to me in that context. After all discussion message boards like this are also a different context than a professional mailing list (and I strongly believe that context is important and not always appropriately taken into account). Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. So I'd stand by my assessment. It isn't that hard. I expect it of myself and my team. I still sometimes fail. Then a CoC, being called out on it, and given constructive criticism helps me.
      - zeroname 8y ago
        > Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. So I'd stand by my assessment. It isn't that hard. I expect it of myself and my team. I still sometimes fail. Then a CoC, being called out on it, and given constructive criticism helps me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(psychology)#Disintegration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(psychology)#Disintegr...
      - kaneua 8y ago
        > Just because something isn't that hard, doesn't mean we don't slip up sometimes. Code of Conduct that you are defending doesn't mention it. It allows to state someone guilty right after first "slip up". Now I can take your comments and present them to the pretty diverse teams you successfully lead and you may be expelled from them due to your heated arguments on HN. But I wouldn't do that. I'm just making an example how exploitable Contrubutor Covenant's policies are.

DanBC 8y ago

Hacker News does have a code of conduct, and the comment was flagged.