4 ms·

She's not exactly keeping her intentions a secret, her Twitter feed makes them pretty clear https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1041465346656530432 https://t

She's not exactly keeping her intentions a secret, her Twitter feed makes them pretty clear https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1041465346656530432 https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1041465346656530432

throwanem 8y ago
I see a whole lot more ugly in the replies to that tweet than in the tweet itself, or in anything else I've seen Ms. Ehmke to say in public. "The CoC is a political document" is a reasonable statement from someone who considers that everything is political. I disagree, and I think a lot of risks attend upon such consideration which Ms. Ehmke and the movement of which she's a part too often fail to recognize. But, disagree though I may with their rationale, at least they have a rationale. Their opposition seems primarily to rely on viciousness. Forced to weigh people who I think are wrong about some things on the one side, and on the other people who plumb the depths of hatred and vileness without the slightest apparent scruple, I hope I may be forgiven for deciding that my sympathies belong with the former.
- adamrezich 8y ago
  "whichever side has the greater proportion of pseudononymous online vitriol directed at them" sounds like a terribly ineffective truth determination heuristic, especially when it comes to public figures like real-name social media users, and political leaders
  - throwanem 8y ago
    I agree. If that were the heuristic I were using, I'd be very concerned. But that's not what I said. What I said was that one side has a rationale, with a good deal of which I do not agree, while the other side very rarely takes a breath save to expel it in a tirade of filth. Attempting to compare these like for like just doesn't even work. The hell of it is, there are worthwhile counterpoints to be made, and people trying to make them. But there's no hearing them through all the garbage, and until we figure out how that changes, I don't see any real prospect of a stable modus vivendi.
    - bitwize 8y ago
      See that's the problem. There are people who object to the CoC, and are quite reasonable about it, and there are people who come out of 8chan or wherever, post "SHITCOCK", and then leave. And then equivocators like you say, "Well, one side is being reasonable and the other is posting nothing but filth." And Ms. FUCK YOU CISHET WHITE DUDES[0] gets the free pass she's been angling for. If you were conspiracy-minded about it, it almost seems like the SHITCOCK posters are agents for the other side, in order to discredit the opposition. (It's happened. Look up Meg Lanker-Simons, a standard issue SJW stupid enough to get caught sexually harassing herself.) [0] https://twitter.com/coralineada/status/1029161113848557569?lang=en https://twitter.com/coralineada/status/1029161113848557569?l... Note that she went on this tirade last month.
      - throwanem 8y ago
        Thanks for linking that thread. It included a link to a discussion of adopting a CoC for the Ruby language project, which in turn linked to this https://where.coraline.codes/blog/on-opalgate/ https://where.coraline.codes/blog/on-opalgate/ - which provides some useful insight and context around that one Github issue from 2015 of which so many make so much. Given that the Opal maintainer was OK with it, and everyone involved came out unscathed, I see nothing of value in so many people who were and are totally uninvolved in the situation trying to cast it as a metonym of some kind of notional SJW thought police. It is not. Where have I given Ms. Ehmke a free pass? Where has anyone?
        bitwize 8y ago
        Well, you've talked a big talk about how vicious the other side has been, but not a peep from you when Ms. Ehmke, herself, lashes out at her critics -- or even people she feels are guilty of not being progressive enough. So Ms. Ehmke's only regret in Opalgate is that she tipped her hand too much too soon, and wasn't vague and concern-trolly enough to convince the Opal project maintainers to evict the allegedly transphobic contributor seemingly of their own accord. Part of the problem people have with the Contributor Covenant is that while there isn't any anti-meritocracy language in the document itself, the rationale for the document cites "dogmatic insistence on meritocratic principles of governance" as a problem that must be corrected. It's right there on https://contributor-covenant.org https://contributor-covenant.org. Previous versions of this document made reference to "the pervasive cult of meritocracy", but again, that was tipping her hand too much so she dialed it back some. Given that meritocracy is the bedrock of open source development principles, chafing at the adoption of a document whose stated purpose is to combat meritocracy is to be expected. Her goal is to make her values open source values, and in the absence of an opportunity to collect scalps, she will look for leverage to twist arms. The strategy is to tone down the language of her CoC and related documents until it's palatable enough to get an in, and then put the screws to the community once they've pledged to uphold her code. Ever play Pandemic? A winning strategy is to start with benign symptoms like sniffles and a sneeze or cough, and then, only once everybody is sick (including those paranoid holdouts in Madagascar), crank up the nausea, vomiting, internal bleeding and heart failure sliders.

throwanem 8y ago

I see a whole lot more ugly in the replies to that tweet than in the tweet itself, or in anything else I've seen Ms. Ehmke to say in public. "The CoC is a political document" is a reasonable statement from someone who considers that everything is political. I disagree, and I think a lot of risks attend upon such consideration which Ms. Ehmke and the movement of which she's a part too often fail to recognize. But, disagree though I may with their rationale, at least they have a rationale. Their opposition seems primarily to rely on viciousness. Forced to weigh people who I think are wrong about some things on the one side, and on the other people who plumb the depths of hatred and vileness without the slightest apparent scruple, I hope I may be forgiven for deciding that my sympathies belong with the former.

adamrezich 8y ago
"whichever side has the greater proportion of pseudononymous online vitriol directed at them" sounds like a terribly ineffective truth determination heuristic, especially when it comes to public figures like real-name social media users, and political leaders
- throwanem 8y ago
  I agree. If that were the heuristic I were using, I'd be very concerned. But that's not what I said. What I said was that one side has a rationale, with a good deal of which I do not agree, while the other side very rarely takes a breath save to expel it in a tirade of filth. Attempting to compare these like for like just doesn't even work. The hell of it is, there are worthwhile counterpoints to be made, and people trying to make them. But there's no hearing them through all the garbage, and until we figure out how that changes, I don't see any real prospect of a stable modus vivendi.
  - bitwize 8y ago
    See that's the problem. There are people who object to the CoC, and are quite reasonable about it, and there are people who come out of 8chan or wherever, post "SHITCOCK", and then leave. And then equivocators like you say, "Well, one side is being reasonable and the other is posting nothing but filth." And Ms. FUCK YOU CISHET WHITE DUDES[0] gets the free pass she's been angling for. If you were conspiracy-minded about it, it almost seems like the SHITCOCK posters are agents for the other side, in order to discredit the opposition. (It's happened. Look up Meg Lanker-Simons, a standard issue SJW stupid enough to get caught sexually harassing herself.) [0] https://twitter.com/coralineada/status/1029161113848557569?lang=en https://twitter.com/coralineada/status/1029161113848557569?l... Note that she went on this tirade last month.
    - throwanem 8y ago
      Thanks for linking that thread. It included a link to a discussion of adopting a CoC for the Ruby language project, which in turn linked to this https://where.coraline.codes/blog/on-opalgate/ https://where.coraline.codes/blog/on-opalgate/ - which provides some useful insight and context around that one Github issue from 2015 of which so many make so much. Given that the Opal maintainer was OK with it, and everyone involved came out unscathed, I see nothing of value in so many people who were and are totally uninvolved in the situation trying to cast it as a metonym of some kind of notional SJW thought police. It is not. Where have I given Ms. Ehmke a free pass? Where has anyone?
      - bitwize 8y ago
        Well, you've talked a big talk about how vicious the other side has been, but not a peep from you when Ms. Ehmke, herself, lashes out at her critics -- or even people she feels are guilty of not being progressive enough. So Ms. Ehmke's only regret in Opalgate is that she tipped her hand too much too soon, and wasn't vague and concern-trolly enough to convince the Opal project maintainers to evict the allegedly transphobic contributor seemingly of their own accord. Part of the problem people have with the Contributor Covenant is that while there isn't any anti-meritocracy language in the document itself, the rationale for the document cites "dogmatic insistence on meritocratic principles of governance" as a problem that must be corrected. It's right there on https://contributor-covenant.org https://contributor-covenant.org. Previous versions of this document made reference to "the pervasive cult of meritocracy", but again, that was tipping her hand too much so she dialed it back some. Given that meritocracy is the bedrock of open source development principles, chafing at the adoption of a document whose stated purpose is to combat meritocracy is to be expected. Her goal is to make her values open source values, and in the absence of an opportunity to collect scalps, she will look for leverage to twist arms. The strategy is to tone down the language of her CoC and related documents until it's palatable enough to get an in, and then put the screws to the community once they've pledged to uphold her code. Ever play Pandemic? A winning strategy is to start with benign symptoms like sniffles and a sneeze or cough, and then, only once everybody is sick (including those paranoid holdouts in Madagascar), crank up the nausea, vomiting, internal bleeding and heart failure sliders.