One Of LLVM's Top Contributors Quits Development Over CoC, Outreach Program

[microcode]

What citation is needed?

How about Linus Torvalds cussing out people on the LKML? Just a small list here:

https://adtmag.com/blogs/dev-watch/2014/04/linus-torvalds-rants.aspx

Theo de Raadt likewise going off on rants about new technologies and passing off his opinions as facts or just being generally abusive:

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Theo_de_Raadt

How about this advertisement from an ostensibly technical server hosting company:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110209160838/http://img341.imageshack.us/i/qsoladvertisementps2.jpg


Shall I go on? There's no end to this kind of thing in the technology sector. There's plenty of this going on behind the scenes in technology companies that never gets to see the light of day. And none of this is needed to get the job done. What's so hard about "Yes you can do it that way, but consider this way: <code added>" and then adding a technical explanations of the merits, instead of "Did you even bother reading what you wrote? This sucks, do it like this instead: <code added>" I know which one I'm more likely to thoughtfully consider.

Who cares? Linus's tree is clearly the gold standard for Linux, the OpenBSD project is incredibly productive, and I had trouble opening your third link on my current network. One of your major claims here seems to be that the occasional harsh word or two completely negates the value of these people, and it seems like you are about as wrong as you could possibly be on that count. The Linux kernel is the most active, most diverse, and most robust open source project on planet earth, and it is run autocratically by somebody who makes harsh statements when he is upset about something. OpenBSD produces the first functioning version of most popular security mitigations and architectural strategies years in advance, while maintaining a highly usable desktop and server operating system, with the world's most beloved network firewall and remote shell server. Theo de Raadt making the occasional harsh comment or statement apparently has not stopped them from leading in their field for going on two decades.

The second part of your claim seems to be that ridding the community of these "jerks" would have a net positive effect. Well, I think that's a tall order, especially considering the community basically exists because of them. Your argument would have been more believable if you stuck to criticizing the fifth-most or less productive members of a given product, but you seem to be equating Rafael Avila de Espindola with Linus Torvalds and Theo de Raadt. If it's not obvious to you that replacing Linus Torvalds or Theo de Raadt would be difficult, then it's hard to imagine you're paying attention.

[microcode]

Sounds like the community will be better off without him. Being a good dev, or making lots of commits, is not all that's involved in a community project. If someone is a jackass who is openly hostile to people based on their sex, religion, etc, then the jackass leaving is in everyone else's best interests. He's probably one of these guys complaining about 'reverse rape' or whatever because he can't find someone willing to sleep with him.

Except he is literally none of these things, and you're just insinuating out of thin air. He has not been openly or implicitly hostile to anyone based on their "sex, religion, etc" by any account. The last straw for him was, in fact, racism and sexism committed by other members of the community.

[fuzz]

“The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.”

-- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

[cybertraveler]

“The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.”

-- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Hey fuzz. If you sit by the river fishing for an hour to catch 3 fish to feed yourself and your family this evening, I'm going relax in the shade behind you while you work and then when you're done I'm going to sneak up behind you, grab the fish (they're not yours they're "the earths" and run). Later -- after I've eaten the earth's fish that you caught -- I'll probably be tired, so I'm going to head over to that neat little construction you made in the forest out of branches , leaves and twine. I'll be there with some friends. We'll wait until you leave and then we will occupy that space. It's not your land and your construction. It's the earths.

(I'm kidding. I'm not actually a dick and I wouldn't actually steal your stuff.)

[fuzz]

Hey fuzz. If you sit by the river fishing for an hour to catch 3 fish to feed yourself and your family this evening, I'm going relax in the shade behind you while you work and then when you're done I'm going to sneak up behind you, grab the fish (they're not yours they're "the earths" and run). Later -- after I've eaten the earth's fish that you caught -- I'll probably be tired, so I'm going to head over to that neat little construction you made in the forest out of branches , leaves and twine. I'll be there with some friends. We'll wait until you leave and then we will occupy that space. It's not your land and your construction. It's the earths.

(I'm kidding. I'm not actually a dick and I wouldn't actually steal your stuff.)

The quote is about the necessity of rules to exist and how we often don't think about their consequences .

As the trend of this forum topic goes, we tend to only have rules to protect against extremists. The very fact that you came up with a "what if" story when you wouldn't actually do that shows the merit of the point!

[cybertraveler]

The quote is about the necessity of rules to exist and how we often don't think about their consequences .

As the trend of this forum topic goes, we tend to only have rules to protect against extremists. The very fact that you came up with a "what if" story when you wouldn't actually do that shows the merit of the point!

It's pretty clear what Jean-Jacques is saying:

"from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor"

He is advocating destruction of another man's property and more generally the abolishment of private property rights in order to save mankind from "horrors and misfortunes".

"the fruits of the earth belong to us all"

Again: very clear. He doesn't care about property rights. He's saying that an individual can't own things on this earth. He's saying we have collective ownership. He sounds dangerous and like somebody that I'd want to live very far away from.

I personally have spent countless hours thinking about the consequences of the values which I support and what their consequences are. I'm quite comfortable advocating that people respect each others property rights and that they should not initiate force against their fellow man. I will not take your fish or trespass on your land. If you were my neighbour I would do my best to support and defend you if you suffered the misfortune of someone else attempting to take your food or occupy your home against your will.

[cybertraveler]

this thread perfectly points out why we need the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution .... to defent our freedom by weapon force against social justice worriors like you who claim CoC Dictatorshipment is needed.

Are you deliberately trying to lower the quality of the conversation here even further?

Or are you drunk? If you are maybe take a step back. You're threatening a stranger with violence over a disagreement in a conversation. Not cool.

[microcode]

This thread perfectly points out why such a CoC is needed: http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/

LLVM is perfectly within it's rights to do what they did, any community is. End of story. You don't like it, go fuck yourself.

(emphasis added)

From http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/:

• Be friendly and patient.
• Be welcoming: We strive to be a community that welcomes and supports people of all backgrounds and identities. This includes, but is not limited to members of any race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, colour, immigration status, social and economic class, educational level, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, size, family status, political belief, religion, and mental and physical ability.
• Be considerate: Your work will be used by other people, and you in turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you take will affect users and colleagues, and you should take those consequences into account when making decisions. Remember that we’re a world-wide community, so you might not be communicating in someone else’s primary language.
• Be respectful: Not all of us will agree all the time, but disagreement is no excuse for poor behavior and poor manners. We might all experience some frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to turn into a personal attack. It’s important to remember that a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one.
• Be careful in the words that we choose: we are a community of professionals, and we conduct ourselves professionally. Be kind to others. Do not insult or put down other participants. Harassment and other exclusionary behavior aren’t acceptable.
• Try to understand why we disagree: Disagreements, both social and technical, happen all the time. It is important that we resolve disagreements and differing views constructively. Remember that we’re different. The strength of our community comes from its diversity, people from a wide range of backgrounds. Different people have different perspectives on issues. Being unable to understand why someone holds a viewpoint doesn’t mean that they’re wrong. Don’t forget that it is human to err and blaming each other doesn’t get us anywhere. Instead, focus on helping to resolve issues and learning from mistakes.

On a more serious note, it seems like the people who advocate most vocally for Codes of Conduct of this sort seem to be the people who don't take decency for granted. If somebody is suggesting a Code of Conduct because they can't believe that people will behave themselves without one, it's probably because they're constantly breaking these rules which can remain unwritten for more decent folk.

Exhibit A: audir8's abhorrent behaviour, which almost everyone else chooses not to emulate (regardless of the written rules), because it's just wrong, and is already a great reason for a person to be removed without event from a discussion group, if they are contributing nothing of particular value.

Exhibit B: in that same webpage, they go off on a tirade which gives full license to bend or break the rules as long as you fit the arbitrary category of "marginalized":

Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding:

• ‘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

Note that they are saying that the things which they say threaten the "safety" of "marginalized" people only threaten the "comfort" of everyone else ("privileged people"). They also explicitly protect any arbitrary action they take in the name of the policy, because they explicitly disallow questioning the definitions of the concepts which underpin the policy. That is to say, the policy is 100% arbitrary, but constructed in such a way to give the impression that it's not, by privileging accusations and completely disallowing defenses on the basis that the situation does not meet the criteria of the policy.

P.S. the introduction of the Code of Conduct was not the main reason he left the project; if you ask me, he was willing to accept a lot.

[xiando]

Some codes even include restrictions on your public communications outside the project.

There's already been too many examples of báizuǒ 白左 聖母婊 dead-weights demanding that main contributes of projects be kicked out because of some joke they made in some corner of the Internet a decade ago.

The only "code of conduct" a software project needs is Contribute Quality Code (CQC). Silly codes of conduct do not compile into working binaries. I'm really glad Linus is in charge of the kernel, he's among the few who dares stand up and say "If you're offended then that's your problem, grow a thicker skin".

[xiando]

Women in general are often harassed and treated poorly when it's discovered that there's a woman behind their account name.

There's a lot of examples of women getting preferred treatment too. A local study in this country found that women are, on average, sentenced to 1/3rd the punishment men are for similar crimes. There's also a study from a city Australia where silly SJWs decided to make all job applications anonymous and gender-neutral. The amount of women hired fell by a stunningly high percentage (meaning that both men and women are much more likely to hire a women if they know it's a woman applying a job).

A brief read through of the llvm CoC doesn't come across at all unreasonable.

So you're fine with this?

"It applies to all of your communication and conduct in these spaces, including emails, chats, things you say, slides, videos, posters, signs, or even t-shirts you display in these spaces. In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may, in rare cases, affect a person’s ability to participate within them, when the conduct amounts to an egregious violation of this code."

LLVM is basially saying that you'll be kicked out if they find you gulty of wrongthink - 1984 style - including wrongthink that has nothing to do with this project.

Sounds like the community will be better off without him. Being a good dev, or making lots of commits, is not all that's involved in
a community project. If someone is a jackass who is openly hostile to people based on their sex, religion, etc, then the jackass leaving is in everyone
else's best interests. He's probably one of these guys complaining about 'reverse rape' or whatever because he can't find someone willing to sleep with him.

Porting LLVM to arm or other platforms does require being a good dev and lots of commits and that really is it. It does not require you to be overly polite and fake. You're also very mistaken about him being a jackass or openly hostile or anything of the sort. It's simply a matter of not wanting to have others dictate how you behave, what words you use and other things that restrict your freedom. I don't avoid projects with CoC bullshit because I want to be a jackass and abuse others, I avoid them because I don't want to restrict myself to using 10 approved words just to ensure that I do not say or do anything that someone could find remotely offensive.

How typical, just brand anyone who questions your totalitarian ideology a "white nationalist" or a "Nazi." Nope. Does not work.

It's interesting that nazi is short for national socialist (The National Socialist German Workers' Party). This makes it interesting and entertaining that socialists - who, like the nazi's, are on the left side of the political spectrum - are quick to call everyone that's not an authoritarian socialist a nazi. The German National Socialist party created an enemy for everyone to hate. Today the modern socialists are doing the same. Of course, they claim the bad nazi's are far-right because shaming people for supposedly being nazis doesn't work if you openly admit that the nazi's had the exact same authoritarian socialist ideas as the modern white left báizuǒ 白左