3 ms·

> The problem with codes of conduct is that many of them contain pro-harassment carve-outs, for vaguely defined groups like "marginalized peoples". They specifi

> The problem with codes of conduct is that many of them contain pro-harassment carve-outs, for vaguely defined groups like "marginalized peoples". They specifically enshrine harassment against by some groups onto other groups. (I will provide citations in the next few hours at lunch if anyone wants) This is simply not true. Harassment is not the same as calling out harassment. Saying "hey, I have a right to exist and be included, stop your exclusionary actions" is fundamentally different from actions to exclude someone in the first place. It is the difference between "we welcome your contributions if you stop attacking others" and "you're not welcome here, leave." If you believe that anyone seeks to harass you on the basis of being white, I suggest you might benefit from a deep examination of the experiences of actual marginalized groups. There's a good chance you're just not aware of the reality others have to deal with. And there's no way to know without a lot of self-directed study. No one can do it for you. You have to have an open mind, be willing to explore uncomfortable topics, and be willing to come to the conclusion that you've behaved poorly in the past out of ignorance. You know, take the rational approach to one's own ignorance.

apostacy 8y ago
> This is simply not true. Harassment is not the same as calling out harassment. Saying "hey, I have a right to exist and be included, stop your exclusionary actions" is fundamentally different from actions to exclude someone in the first place. It is the difference between "we welcome your contributions if you stop attacking others" and "you're not welcome here, leave." I'm afraid it is true. "Calling out harassment" as you call it is incredibly vague, and harassment and trolling could easily be framed in those terms. But, even so, they don't even make that distinction. They simply say that you can essentially do no wrong if you make the unverified claim of being a "marginalized person". Look at these terms: * ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ * Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you” * Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts * Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial * Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/107#issuecomment-182791714 https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/107#issuec... If you are labeled as "oppressive", your trolls get immunity. And who defines what "oppressive" means? Simply expressing gentle disagreement or criticism of a "marginalized persons" pull request can be considered oppressive. Even not sufficiently affirming or validating someone can get you labeled this way. And trolls DO use this. Trolls absolutely make a game of turning communities against each other. I've seen it happen. > If you believe that anyone seeks to harass you on the basis of being white. Gonna have to stop you right there. You don't know anything about my ethnicity, and it does not matter. You need to be able to make a point without falling back on that. > No one can do it for you. You have to have an open mind, be willing to explore uncomfortable topics, and be willing to come to the conclusion that you've behaved poorly in the past out of ignorance. You know, take the rational approach to one's own ignorance. These condescending platitudes are not helpful, and say more about you than anyone else.
- chowells 8y ago
  OK, I read your link. I don't see anything in it matching your claims. What I see is a list of dogwhistles being called out as dogwhistles. If you have a complaint based on actual behaviors, they'll still investigate it. What they won't do is waste time investigating the formulaic nonsense spewed by people seeking to attack those who are calling out bad behavior. But pay close attention. They are talking about the form of a complaint. If you have a complaint that takes the form of "this behavior is abusive," it will still be considered. For what it's worth, I have no doubt that trolls have tried to hide behind claims of being oppressed before. But I have never seen a systemic case of it creating immunity from criticism. I have seen a couple individuals who think they get away with it, but only on venues that don't make systemic efforts to enforce good behavior, like Twitter. Do you have a specific example of a troll being shielded by github's policies? > > If you believe that anyone seeks to harass you on the basis of being white. > Gonna have to stop you right there. You don't know anything about my ethnicity, and it does not matter. You need to be able to make a point without falling back on that. Gonna have to ask that you read what I wrote. Like, the very first word. "If". I was adding a special note in case your situation matches the hypothetical. If your situation does not match, you have not caught me. I made no assumptions. I added context for a common case among all likely readers on this site. For further context, I'm a middle-aged white man. I used to think about these issues in a way that would make me say things very similar to what you have been saying. In my case, that's because I was sheltered and unaware how many advantages I had. I was only aware of a few glaring disadvantages. As I grew up, I noticed there were some groups of people I offended systematically, even when I didn't mean to. By my early 30s, I had finally seen this enough to acknowledge that the problem was me. I made an effort to learn as much as I could about why people disagree with me. I kept an open mind, I accepted that my ignorance was damaging to people I didn't understand, and I broadened my understanding in order to stop it. You know, the rational approach to one's own ignorance. Oh, wait, those are condescending platitudes. Except they're also a non-condescending description of exactly what I did. Heres the thing - your viewpoint is nothing new to me. I used to agree with it. But then I added more information, and I found I couldn't agree with it anymore. I deeply regret how long it took me to finally notice these blatant things about how the world works. And I've got a structural postscript - I'm not replying to you to try to change your mind. I'm asking you, and everyone else reading who agrees with you a bit, to be willing to question your assumptions. You don't need to change your mind. But at least be willing to accept that some of those who disagree with you do because they started where you are and then learned more.
belorn 8y ago
You are talking about the definition of harassment so lets explore that with a few examples: Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they voted for the wrong political party? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they voiced a political opinion with someone else? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because something they did in private with someone else? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they have membership in an other group? Those are some of the issues that people have with code of conducts.

apostacy 8y ago

> This is simply not true. Harassment is not the same as calling out harassment. Saying "hey, I have a right to exist and be included, stop your exclusionary actions" is fundamentally different from actions to exclude someone in the first place. It is the difference between "we welcome your contributions if you stop attacking others" and "you're not welcome here, leave." I'm afraid it is true. "Calling out harassment" as you call it is incredibly vague, and harassment and trolling could easily be framed in those terms. But, even so, they don't even make that distinction. They simply say that you can essentially do no wrong if you make the unverified claim of being a "marginalized person". Look at these terms: * ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ * Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you” * Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts * Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial * Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/107#issuecomment-182791714 https://github.com/dear-github/dear-github/issues/107#issuec... If you are labeled as "oppressive", your trolls get immunity. And who defines what "oppressive" means? Simply expressing gentle disagreement or criticism of a "marginalized persons" pull request can be considered oppressive. Even not sufficiently affirming or validating someone can get you labeled this way. And trolls DO use this. Trolls absolutely make a game of turning communities against each other. I've seen it happen. > If you believe that anyone seeks to harass you on the basis of being white. Gonna have to stop you right there. You don't know anything about my ethnicity, and it does not matter. You need to be able to make a point without falling back on that. > No one can do it for you. You have to have an open mind, be willing to explore uncomfortable topics, and be willing to come to the conclusion that you've behaved poorly in the past out of ignorance. You know, take the rational approach to one's own ignorance. These condescending platitudes are not helpful, and say more about you than anyone else.

chowells 8y ago
OK, I read your link. I don't see anything in it matching your claims. What I see is a list of dogwhistles being called out as dogwhistles. If you have a complaint based on actual behaviors, they'll still investigate it. What they won't do is waste time investigating the formulaic nonsense spewed by people seeking to attack those who are calling out bad behavior. But pay close attention. They are talking about the form of a complaint. If you have a complaint that takes the form of "this behavior is abusive," it will still be considered. For what it's worth, I have no doubt that trolls have tried to hide behind claims of being oppressed before. But I have never seen a systemic case of it creating immunity from criticism. I have seen a couple individuals who think they get away with it, but only on venues that don't make systemic efforts to enforce good behavior, like Twitter. Do you have a specific example of a troll being shielded by github's policies? > > If you believe that anyone seeks to harass you on the basis of being white. > Gonna have to stop you right there. You don't know anything about my ethnicity, and it does not matter. You need to be able to make a point without falling back on that. Gonna have to ask that you read what I wrote. Like, the very first word. "If". I was adding a special note in case your situation matches the hypothetical. If your situation does not match, you have not caught me. I made no assumptions. I added context for a common case among all likely readers on this site. For further context, I'm a middle-aged white man. I used to think about these issues in a way that would make me say things very similar to what you have been saying. In my case, that's because I was sheltered and unaware how many advantages I had. I was only aware of a few glaring disadvantages. As I grew up, I noticed there were some groups of people I offended systematically, even when I didn't mean to. By my early 30s, I had finally seen this enough to acknowledge that the problem was me. I made an effort to learn as much as I could about why people disagree with me. I kept an open mind, I accepted that my ignorance was damaging to people I didn't understand, and I broadened my understanding in order to stop it. You know, the rational approach to one's own ignorance. Oh, wait, those are condescending platitudes. Except they're also a non-condescending description of exactly what I did. Heres the thing - your viewpoint is nothing new to me. I used to agree with it. But then I added more information, and I found I couldn't agree with it anymore. I deeply regret how long it took me to finally notice these blatant things about how the world works. And I've got a structural postscript - I'm not replying to you to try to change your mind. I'm asking you, and everyone else reading who agrees with you a bit, to be willing to question your assumptions. You don't need to change your mind. But at least be willing to accept that some of those who disagree with you do because they started where you are and then learned more.

belorn 8y ago

You are talking about the definition of harassment so lets explore that with a few examples: Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they voted for the wrong political party? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they voiced a political opinion with someone else? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because something they did in private with someone else? Is it harassment to treat someone badly because they have membership in an other group? Those are some of the issues that people have with code of conducts.