3 ms·

CoCs are one of the reasons why I choose to not contribute. I don't enjoy the risk of someone with an axe to grind to drag me into some absurd GitHub comments d

CoCs are one of the reasons why I choose to not contribute. I don't enjoy the risk of someone with an axe to grind to drag me into some absurd GitHub comments drama and feel justified by some generic wording on the CoC.

Mashimo 1y ago
But could they not do the same without a CoC?
- cybrox 1y ago
  Yes, that's the point of why CoCs are essentially useless. Humans should be able to interact politely in any setting and if they don't, the issue needs to be settled with good old human interaction anyways.
  - rpdillon 1y ago
    This is how I feel. I treat the presence of a code of conduct as a sign that, particularly for small projects, the folks running the project don't have experience leading others. Always comes down to the relationship, the individuals involved, and the way things are communicated.
- ricardobeat 1y ago
  They could, but then it’s their word vs yours, not you vs sacred Code-of-Conduct.
- lelanthran 1y ago
  > But could they not do the same without a CoC? Sure, but someone who went to the trouble to get their view enforced in writing is probably already a zealot I don't want to deal with. Depends a lot on the group size, too - a few hundred contributors probably needs some rules written down. A few dozen? Not so much.
silisili 1y ago
Same, but for slightly different reasons. I was a big open source contributor of a few well known projects, but the CoC stuff just kinda soured me on it all. Not because I enjoy reading or writing hate speech or anything, but these were places that didn't tend to have any obvious problems with troublemakers, so it felt self congratulatory. And don't even get me started on the sheer amount of bikeshedding the discussions around it became, mostly from people who'd never even contributed to the project. It suddenly made me realize there were probably more productive and less frustrating ways to spend my time.
axython 1y ago
Serious question - Why do you contribute to HN, which has a CoC?

Mashimo 1y ago

But could they not do the same without a CoC?

cybrox 1y ago
Yes, that's the point of why CoCs are essentially useless. Humans should be able to interact politely in any setting and if they don't, the issue needs to be settled with good old human interaction anyways.
- rpdillon 1y ago
  This is how I feel. I treat the presence of a code of conduct as a sign that, particularly for small projects, the folks running the project don't have experience leading others. Always comes down to the relationship, the individuals involved, and the way things are communicated.
ricardobeat 1y ago
They could, but then it’s their word vs yours, not you vs sacred Code-of-Conduct.
lelanthran 1y ago
> But could they not do the same without a CoC? Sure, but someone who went to the trouble to get their view enforced in writing is probably already a zealot I don't want to deal with. Depends a lot on the group size, too - a few hundred contributors probably needs some rules written down. A few dozen? Not so much.

silisili 1y ago

Same, but for slightly different reasons. I was a big open source contributor of a few well known projects, but the CoC stuff just kinda soured me on it all. Not because I enjoy reading or writing hate speech or anything, but these were places that didn't tend to have any obvious problems with troublemakers, so it felt self congratulatory. And don't even get me started on the sheer amount of bikeshedding the discussions around it became, mostly from people who'd never even contributed to the project. It suddenly made me realize there were probably more productive and less frustrating ways to spend my time.

axython 1y ago

Serious question - Why do you contribute to HN, which has a CoC?