3 ms·

So, is it illegitimate, then, to have a FOSS project with an intentional/cultivated "culture of abuse", where the idea is that nobody is kind to anybody and tha

So, is it illegitimate, then, to have a FOSS project with an intentional/cultivated "culture of abuse", where the idea is that nobody is kind to anybody and that's how everybody likes it? The thing about this hypothetical is that it's wildly different from what Linus Torvald mailing list abuse winds up being. The approach is "we have a culture of anything goes, not because anyone likes abuse, but it's best way to get things done, and because most competent people do things that way, starting with Linus himself, who's clearly ultra-competent". Essentially, while there might be some similarities to each, the abuse in open source culture is far more similar to cult abuse than BDSM activity. In cult-style abuse a person entering a project would confronted by escalating abuse and they either flee or accept and begin to normalize it whereas in BDSM, a person is given a description of what they're getting into from the start (though shading towards other "styles" is a hazard here too, of course). Thing is there are a spectrum of approaches on the Internet but with the Internet no longer young, it's understandable people are concerned about where various styles end up. I have a friend who frequents 4Chan and says they get a lot out of the anything goes styles - "you just have to be willing to accept being called a fag and not taking any of it seriously". The problem is it's known that a substantiale-enough-to-dangerous group of people take the abuse as exactly that point and rather than seeing at restricting it naming calling in forums, live stream mass murder (say, they guy in Australia). This takes people a little aback. BDSM irl has a lot of controls to prevent people from taking it "seriously", the point isn't to have some who want to torture in a no-limits fashion. If you could have some equivalent way to filter out people who can't separate play from reality, that would be great but I haven't the more abusive nooks of the Internet being very good at that.

derefr 7y ago
Linux might be where many people's minds go by default in this comparison, but it's not the example I meant to conjure here. I'm talking more about, for example, the FOSS communities around game-console homebrew tooling, where any given project is usually an outgrowth of some private Discord somewhere—some pre-existing group of friends—and so everyone on the project calls one-another names in the [public] GitHub issues; often actively trolls one-another with counter-productive PRs or issue-filings; sometimes creates new projects from scratch to replace/obsolete someone else's project just because A disagrees with B about some minor non-software-related thing, e.g. taste in music, and so "can't respect them or their software"; etc. These people are clearly playing around as they make this software—and often producing the software rather sub-optimally in the process—but the goal of most of these project communities is clearly to have fun with the process of making software, not to end up with useful software. And now, back to the question: are these projects, and their processes, to be considered societally acceptable? Or are they "canceled?" Would adding a Code-of-Conduct stating clearly what they're doing in the project even help? (IMHO it doesn't seem like it'd make much of a difference; it's not like these projects get outside contribution anyways.)
- Ghjklov 7y ago
  https://filepush.co/2Hvm/degradation-of-hobby.jpg https://filepush.co/2Hvm/degradation-of-hobby.jpg My guess is something like this: Once the project becomes big/useful enough and normal people are now using and relying on it, then they can start ousting the eccentrics/untolerables because at a large enough population, normal people just naturally outnumber them. Disclaimer: Image is just an example to express an idea/concept. I do not endorse whatever is in the image and my post does not represent my employer, Unemployed Inc.
- joe_the_user 7y ago
  The thing with semi-abusive, semi-fun-loving group of friends and the perhaps multitude of kind of ambiguously abusive relationships one might notice small circles of people, is that these seldom scale to millions of people nor do they scale to long periods of time.

derefr 7y ago

Linux might be where many people's minds go by default in this comparison, but it's not the example I meant to conjure here. I'm talking more about, for example, the FOSS communities around game-console homebrew tooling, where any given project is usually an outgrowth of some private Discord somewhere—some pre-existing group of friends—and so everyone on the project calls one-another names in the [public] GitHub issues; often actively trolls one-another with counter-productive PRs or issue-filings; sometimes creates new projects from scratch to replace/obsolete someone else's project just because A disagrees with B about some minor non-software-related thing, e.g. taste in music, and so "can't respect them or their software"; etc. These people are clearly playing around as they make this software—and often producing the software rather sub-optimally in the process—but the goal of most of these project communities is clearly to have fun with the process of making software, not to end up with useful software. And now, back to the question: are these projects, and their processes, to be considered societally acceptable? Or are they "canceled?" Would adding a Code-of-Conduct stating clearly what they're doing in the project even help? (IMHO it doesn't seem like it'd make much of a difference; it's not like these projects get outside contribution anyways.)

Ghjklov 7y ago
https://filepush.co/2Hvm/degradation-of-hobby.jpg https://filepush.co/2Hvm/degradation-of-hobby.jpg My guess is something like this: Once the project becomes big/useful enough and normal people are now using and relying on it, then they can start ousting the eccentrics/untolerables because at a large enough population, normal people just naturally outnumber them. Disclaimer: Image is just an example to express an idea/concept. I do not endorse whatever is in the image and my post does not represent my employer, Unemployed Inc.
joe_the_user 7y ago
The thing with semi-abusive, semi-fun-loving group of friends and the perhaps multitude of kind of ambiguously abusive relationships one might notice small circles of people, is that these seldom scale to millions of people nor do they scale to long periods of time.