Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Linux Code of Conduct Revisions: CoC Committee Added Plus Interpretation & Mediator

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Linux Code of Conduct Revisions: CoC Committee Added Plus Interpretation & Mediator

    Phoronix: New Linux Code of Conduct Revisions: CoC Committee Added Plus Interpretation & Mediator

    The Linux Code of Conduct introduced last month that ended up being quite contentious will see some revisions just ahead of the Linux 4.19 stable kernel release. Greg Kroah-Hartman has outlined the planned changes as well as a new Code of Conduct Interpretation document...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...reg-KH-Revised

  • #2
    Damn SJW idiots.

    Comment


    • #3
      If you make a law and it needs 5 times bigger "Interpretation" document, that's alarming.

      In Poland we have tax laws and the ministry of finances publishes interpretations. The worst thing that happens is, when they change the interpretation, it applies to past events.

      Comment


      • #4
        This seems a lot less insane than what was initially feared.

        Comment


        • #5
          It's great to see that this is finally happening and it even seems like they're taking things seriously.

          Comment


          • #6
            Well, the part about the interpretation being flexible is not exactly reassuring but the rest of the language seems very reasonable. At least they put some safeties in place to prevent people from having the master/slave and the likes kind of debates and acknowledge that CoC enforcement will be used as the last resort.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by M1kkko View Post
              This seems a lot less insane than what was initially feared.
              It was until this line: Enforcement of the code of conduct will only be a last resort option.

              You see, it's written nicely, but the meaning, if it's lost on anyone, is that they fully intend to enforce this bullshit. I'm also not sure if we can trust this Mishi Choudhary to be truly neutral in this, the first alarm bell is that she's a woman, and there's nothing really wrong with her being a woman but in cases where SJWs are involved with their 'feelings over logic!' approach to life, women are a lot likelier to fall for their bullshit and a lot likelier to be part of their movement for some reason. I'm willing to give her some benefit of doubt though, because there are no real signs that she is one, after a google search the only related thing i found was some lgbt shit, which sjws are related to, sure, but it's not always related to sjws. Maybe she's fine, she seems too smart to be part of the sjw movement anyways, apparently now we have to find out the hard way. The biggest alarm bell of course; is that she's willingly a part of this whole mess.

              Also well, the guy from Poland rang a bunch of other alarm bells. And it's true that if you need a 5 times bigger interpretation than the initial document, there's something wrong with the initial document.

              This here is a classic case of sjw style damage control, it's just a little bit of misdirection, it doesn't actually change anything for the better. It's to make us argue over this and leave the underlying COC alone. And here's the thing, whether or not we can trust Mishi Choudhary to be neutral is besides the point, if we can't, then we'll waste energy accusing her of being biased towards sjw agenda, instead of fighting back the real underlying bullshit.

              In a nutshell: Don't fall for this guys.
              Last edited by rabcor; 10-20-2018, 01:22 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Doing all of this, including the decision have a CoC to begin with, in secret was clearly a mistake. Openness is one of the most fundamental aspects of open source software development and doing something like this hidden from the wider kernel development community like it was done simply spits in the face of everyone who values the fundamental principles of open source.

                Unlike the Meltdown/Spectre vulnerability fixes there really isn't a reason to keep policy like this hidden from the wider development community only to spring it as a done deal at the same time it's revealed to both the wider development community and the public. We're talking about something so fundamentally against the basic principles of open source the whole thing, including the decision to even have a CoC, should be returned to the drawing board and have Greg & Co excluded from further proceedings due to how badly they've broken people's trust.

                Maybe I'm slightly drunk as I'm writing this, but the whole way the CoC was written up in complete secrecy and then sprung on the wider kernel development development community as a done deal and something they have a very limited say on, including no say whatsoever if it's even necessary to begin with, simply reeks!
                Last edited by L_A_G; 10-20-2018, 01:29 PM.
                "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Long and convoluted texts are not a very good sign. A rule must be simple and easy to understand by everyone supposed to respect it. This thing sounds like someone says "I really really like this insane CoC so i will put it on your face but do not worry it will only be for the show and we are aware you exist and you are worried but screw you".

                  And more generally, i live in a country where if you pertain to a social group and shove this kind of militancy under people's nose you would be treated exactly as if you had asked a code of conduct to communicate with ghosts or underpant gnomes. You would end up kindly discredited, your proposition would be quickly voted, dismissed and nobody would take what you say seriously afterwards.

                  Unless you live in some sort of anarcho-syndicalist commune or other fringe community.

                  That this nonsense is not simply retracted baffles me. I have no idea if this will be followed by some effect but this is cringeworthy to watch.
                  Last edited by Dedale; 10-20-2018, 01:57 PM. Reason: typos

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MadCatX View Post
                    Well, the part about the interpretation being flexible is not exactly reassuring but the rest of the language seems very reasonable. At least they put some safeties in place to prevent people from having the master/slave and the likes kind of debates and acknowledge that CoC enforcement will be used as the last resort.
                    That's how you boil a frog, slowly by degrees.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X