3 ms·

I'm not trying to personally nitpick any of the individual points, since there's already a process in place for that discussion, I'm just asking if it ever cros

by Mizza 6y ago

I'm not trying to personally nitpick any of the individual points, since there's already a process in place for that discussion, I'm just asking if it ever crosses a line into cultural imperialism, and if so, where is that line? > Which "left-wing american values" are those specificly Without even mentioning any specifics of the documents, I guess I'm referring to the general trend of the HR-ification of everything. There has been a huge creation of rule systems which give elites and managers more weapons to bludgeon people and groups who want to operate differently than the universal corporate structure, largely as a way of preventing the need to save face in the case of social media outrage. One thing I have noticed from multiple real life experiences: this mentality rots organizations. The HR-minded are more concerned with creating an impossible perfect organization that crashes into the ground than creating an imperfect organization that actually produces something of tangible social value. Re: deletionism, it includes this: > Repeated removal of Wikimedia content without appropriate peer review or constructive feedback for improvement Which hopefully could help address drive-by speedy deletions.

disposekinetics 6y ago
> Without even mentioning any specifics of the documents, I guess I'm referring to the general trend of the HR-ification of everything. There has been a huge creation of rule systems which give elites and managers more weapons to bludgeon people and groups who want to operate differently than the universal corporate structure, largely as a way of preventing the need to save face in the case of social media outrage. This is such a strange trend. Organizations are adopting American style progressive ethos, but not via their explicit values but via inserted HR processes that seem to be en vogue. > One thing I have noticed from multiple real life experiences: this mentality rots organizations. The HR-minded are more concerned with creating an impossible perfect organization that crashes into the ground than creating an imperfect organization that actually produces something of tangible social value. It is hard not to see this as a form of entryism in that the people pushing these polices are looking for the power and control without the cost of creation. However, I think there is a far more cynical approach. A huge company can bare the cost of socially expensive HR-values but a small open source team cannot afford the toll of the policies.
- Mizza 6y ago
  > This is such a strange trend. Organizations are adopting American style progressive ethos, but not via their explicit values but via inserted HR processes that seem to be en vogue. Exactly. I think it's obviously dangerous to allow the corporate class to take the moral high ground. Apple will gladly publicly support any progressive social program of the week - as long as there is no need for _any_ material change - but will still use slave labour to produce their products.[1] This is now 100% universal. [1]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-china-xinjiang-factory-nike-shoe-apple-dell-volkswagen-a9366956.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-...
bawolff 6y ago
Fair enough, ossification of rules and too much beurocracy can kill a project. People already posit that rule explosion is linked to a decline in wikipedia. > Re: deletionism, it includes this: I think usually deletionism more implies following proper procedure and due process to delete things (including speedy deletion if the page fits the criteria). I think the code of conduct doc is more concerned with deletions as targeted abuse of power, which is a bit different. Deciding what should be deleted and should not be is something highly vested in the local community and i doubt anyone would want to try to attempt to centralize it
jolux 6y ago
I mean, you can't just call any attempt to impose structure on social formations "HRification." You're ignoring social contract theory and the liberal history and philosophy of governance over the past 400 years. HR is a problem because its main job is shielding a corporation from lawsuits by entangling victims in bureaucracy, not because it tries to set rules to protect the vulnerable.
- Mizza 6y ago
  I don't think that's true. I'm specifically talking about the top-down rather than democratic or collaborative imposition of moral frameworks. Though the creation of this document was ostensibly democratic - though, without proper international participation in my opinion - it was mandated by the board, which dooms it from the start, regardless of the content (which I largely agree with, save for the focus on empathy over correctness, which I find ideological).
  - jolux 6y ago
    Why do you keep acting like these are somehow purely western standards that nobody else agrees with or cares about? Human rights are valued by the UN. I don’t think it’s wrong to believe in a universal set of values. Ultimately even the US Constitution is an elite document written by elite people. This sort of thing is inevitable, history is a power struggle even when it results in more liberated outcomes.

by Mizza 6y ago

disposekinetics 6y ago

> Without even mentioning any specifics of the documents, I guess I'm referring to the general trend of the HR-ification of everything. There has been a huge creation of rule systems which give elites and managers more weapons to bludgeon people and groups who want to operate differently than the universal corporate structure, largely as a way of preventing the need to save face in the case of social media outrage. This is such a strange trend. Organizations are adopting American style progressive ethos, but not via their explicit values but via inserted HR processes that seem to be en vogue. > One thing I have noticed from multiple real life experiences: this mentality rots organizations. The HR-minded are more concerned with creating an impossible perfect organization that crashes into the ground than creating an imperfect organization that actually produces something of tangible social value. It is hard not to see this as a form of entryism in that the people pushing these polices are looking for the power and control without the cost of creation. However, I think there is a far more cynical approach. A huge company can bare the cost of socially expensive HR-values but a small open source team cannot afford the toll of the policies.

Mizza 6y ago
> This is such a strange trend. Organizations are adopting American style progressive ethos, but not via their explicit values but via inserted HR processes that seem to be en vogue. Exactly. I think it's obviously dangerous to allow the corporate class to take the moral high ground. Apple will gladly publicly support any progressive social program of the week - as long as there is no need for _any_ material change - but will still use slave labour to produce their products.[1] This is now 100% universal. [1]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-china-xinjiang-factory-nike-shoe-apple-dell-volkswagen-a9366956.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/uighur-muslim-...

bawolff 6y ago

Fair enough, ossification of rules and too much beurocracy can kill a project. People already posit that rule explosion is linked to a decline in wikipedia. > Re: deletionism, it includes this: I think usually deletionism more implies following proper procedure and due process to delete things (including speedy deletion if the page fits the criteria). I think the code of conduct doc is more concerned with deletions as targeted abuse of power, which is a bit different. Deciding what should be deleted and should not be is something highly vested in the local community and i doubt anyone would want to try to attempt to centralize it

jolux 6y ago

I mean, you can't just call any attempt to impose structure on social formations "HRification." You're ignoring social contract theory and the liberal history and philosophy of governance over the past 400 years. HR is a problem because its main job is shielding a corporation from lawsuits by entangling victims in bureaucracy, not because it tries to set rules to protect the vulnerable.

Mizza 6y ago
I don't think that's true. I'm specifically talking about the top-down rather than democratic or collaborative imposition of moral frameworks. Though the creation of this document was ostensibly democratic - though, without proper international participation in my opinion - it was mandated by the board, which dooms it from the start, regardless of the content (which I largely agree with, save for the focus on empathy over correctness, which I find ideological).
- jolux 6y ago
  Why do you keep acting like these are somehow purely western standards that nobody else agrees with or cares about? Human rights are valued by the UN. I don’t think it’s wrong to believe in a universal set of values. Ultimately even the US Constitution is an elite document written by elite people. This sort of thing is inevitable, history is a power struggle even when it results in more liberated outcomes.