4 ms·

I'm probably going to go down with you; but can you elaborate on that a little?

by eckza 6y ago

ReptileMan 6y ago
It is the same problem as with censorship/fact checkers etc ... who do you trust to determine what is truth/fake news/coc violation and why do you trust them. In abstract the CoC are fine if are written and enforced by impartial angels with well developed common sense. The people that usually push for them are for politics and power.
theshrike79 6y ago
People start using them to thought-police people. Yes, a Code of Conduct is a good way to say no to harrasment, racism and stuff that's generally frowned upon. But, as this case proves, they devolve too easily into thought police level crap, where the "Code" becomes vague and filled with useless buzzwords, that could be construed to fit any situation someone disagrees with. And with the current cancel culture, there is a real, verifiable threat to people's livelihood when they are judged by Twitter Court for breaking a CoC.
torstenvl 6y ago
I'm not the OP but: - There is no presumption of innocence. - There are no formal rights of an accused. - There is no clear delineation of what constitutes a violation. - There is no right to confront those making an allegation. - There are no negative consequences for making a false allegation. - All of which leads to a system whereby people are subjected to ostracism and official censure for violating unwritten rules, all without proof. A person can find their life ruined merely by saying the wrong thing or in the wrong tone, all while being told that the system is just and fair and seeking to protect the vulnerable. It is dishonest, it is gaslighting, and it is frankly Soviet. I am a criminal defense attorney with experience in personnel law. I know first hand how important the presumption of innocence is, and I know first hand how disastrous these personnel management "policies" can be.
- StreamBright 6y ago
  Exactly. > All of which leads to a system whereby people are subjected to ostracism and official censure for violating unwritten rules, all without proof Aka which hunt. The downvoter crew has already arrived though.
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  There are people who are openly hostile to all of these ancient principles. It's not just people who are too green to know better. I've seen a user with a 2007 vintage account and >30k karma extol the virtue of smear campaigns. Scary times.
- StillBored 6y ago
  A lot of them don't seem to have a "warning" phase either. In a lot of cases I'm guessing the harasser isn't really aware that someone is feeling harassed. Plus, in many cases they don't get applied equally anyway, the project leader is going to get handled a lot differently than a random contributor. AKA one gets sent to etiquette school, the other gets banned from the conference and mailing list.

I'm probably going to go down with you; but can you elaborate on that a little?

by eckza 6y ago

I'm probably going to go down with you; but can you elaborate on that a little?

It is the same problem as with censorship/fact checkers etc ... who do you trust to determine what is truth/fake news/coc violation and why do you trust them. In abstract the CoC are fine if are written and enforced by impartial angels with well developed common sense. The people that usually push for them are for politics and power.

theshrike79 6y ago

People start using them to thought-police people. Yes, a Code of Conduct is a good way to say no to harrasment, racism and stuff that's generally frowned upon. But, as this case proves, they devolve too easily into thought police level crap, where the "Code" becomes vague and filled with useless buzzwords, that could be construed to fit any situation someone disagrees with. And with the current cancel culture, there is a real, verifiable threat to people's livelihood when they are judged by Twitter Court for breaking a CoC.

torstenvl 6y ago

I'm not the OP but: - There is no presumption of innocence. - There are no formal rights of an accused. - There is no clear delineation of what constitutes a violation. - There is no right to confront those making an allegation. - There are no negative consequences for making a false allegation. - All of which leads to a system whereby people are subjected to ostracism and official censure for violating unwritten rules, all without proof. A person can find their life ruined merely by saying the wrong thing or in the wrong tone, all while being told that the system is just and fair and seeking to protect the vulnerable. It is dishonest, it is gaslighting, and it is frankly Soviet. I am a criminal defense attorney with experience in personnel law. I know first hand how important the presumption of innocence is, and I know first hand how disastrous these personnel management "policies" can be.

StreamBright 6y ago
Exactly. > All of which leads to a system whereby people are subjected to ostracism and official censure for violating unwritten rules, all without proof Aka which hunt. The downvoter crew has already arrived though.
rmrfstar 6y ago
There are people who are openly hostile to all of these ancient principles. It's not just people who are too green to know better. I've seen a user with a 2007 vintage account and >30k karma extol the virtue of smear campaigns. Scary times.
StillBored 6y ago
A lot of them don't seem to have a "warning" phase either. In a lot of cases I'm guessing the harasser isn't really aware that someone is feeling harassed. Plus, in many cases they don't get applied equally anyway, the project leader is going to get handled a lot differently than a random contributor. AKA one gets sent to etiquette school, the other gets banned from the conference and mailing list.