4 ms·
I dont see "pretty clear guidelines". I see an attempt to regulate complex human behaviour in a one dimensional document. it does not consider culture, traditi
by cabraca 8y ago
I dont see "pretty clear guidelines".
I see an attempt to regulate complex human behaviour in a one dimensional document. it does not consider culture, tradition and upbringing in different regions. a friendly comment in one culture could be seen as unwelcoming or even sexist in another.
the same with "Focusing on what is best for the community" .. there is no single "best" and no single "community". its a melting pot of cultures, countries and people. what benefits one might not benefit the others.
this CoC is just an attempt to regulate what you cant regulate. maybe just replace it with "dont be an idiot, respect others and assume good intentions".
- matthewmacleod 8y agoa friendly comment in one culture could be seen as unwelcoming or even sexist in another. It could be. That's why subjective interpretation and reasonableness are concepts. there is no single "best" and no single "community" There is clearly a single community by any reasonable definition – diffuse though it may be. The role of a set of guidelines is to establish what behaviour that community has generally decided is acceptable or not acceptable. We accept this kind of moderation guideline all of the time. maybe just replace it with "dont be an idiot, respect others and assume good intentions". Yeah, that's basically what it says in a little bit more detail, and with a few more examples. So where's the issue?
- cabraca 8y agothe issue is with people who will follow the CoC to the letter. who will interpret something one says so it fits the CoC definition and will ask for their heads. just look at the stuff happening to Theodore Ts’o https://twitter.com/_sagesharp_/status/1042769399596437504 https://twitter.com/_sagesharp_/status/1042769399596437504