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

  • duby229
    replied
    Originally posted by triangle View Post

    Would a code of conduct like the one discus here improve Phoronix? I personally don't like ass holes, but I would defend the write to be an asshole. The code of conduct takes that write away.
    The problem with your theory is that you only have the freedom to be an asshole if nobody else is a aware of it. We all break that rule from time to time though. Being an asshole isn't the worst of it, being prejudiced is what the worst of it is.

    Leave a comment:


  • triangle
    replied
    Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
    It's amazing that each time there's any news on Code of Conducts we see in the comment section on Phoronix exactly why Code of Conducts are required

    Even if you held the comments against the old "Be awesome" mantra - would anyone actually fit that description?

    Name calling, personal insults, none of it code or genuine attempts at improving things - just the usual Phoronix cesspit
    Would a code of conduct like the one discus here improve Phoronix? I personally don't like ass holes, but I would defend the write to be an asshole. The code of conduct takes that write away.

    Leave a comment:


  • duby229
    replied
    Originally posted by willmore View Post

    You just violated the CoC by disparaging someone over their mental condition.
    Yeah, I could've let it alone. But as you just verified, you recognized the same thing I posted. Maybe it was wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • willmore
    replied
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post

    Oh boy.... Bat shit crazy....
    You just violated the CoC by disparaging someone over their mental condition.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanL
    replied
    Originally posted by rabcor View Post
    My point ->
    Your head: (☭ ͜ʖ ☭)
    The feeling is mutual. My point was that even when you're trying not to be sexist, you're still sexist.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sheshbazzar
    replied
    http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/...104277i20.html

    There is indeed a reactionary hate mob forming on twitter. But most
    of the thoughtful commentators have been supportive, even if they
    disagree with the particulars of our CoC, They total get that we are
    not being exclusive, but rather setting a standard of behavior for
    participation in the SQLite community.

    I have tried to make that point clear in the preface to the CoC, that
    we have no intention of enforcing any particular religious system on
    anybody, and that everyone is welcomed to participate in the community
    regardless of ones religious proclivities. The only requirement is
    that while participating in the SQLite community, your behavior not be
    in direct conflict with time-tested and centuries-old Christian
    ethics. Nobody has to adhere to a particular creed. Merely
    demonstrate professional behavior and all is well.

    Many detractors appear to have not read the preface, or if they read
    it, they did not understand it. This might be because I have not
    explained it well. The preface has been revised, months ago, to
    address prior criticism from the twitter crowd. I think the current
    preface is definitely an improvement over what was up at first. But,
    there might be ways of improving it further. Thoughtful suggestions
    are welcomed.

    So the question then arises: If strict adherence to the Rule of St.
    Benedict is not required, why even have a CoC?

    Several reasons: First, "professional behavior" is ill-defined. What
    is professional to some might be unprofessional to others. The Rule
    attempts to clarify what "professional behavior" means. When I was
    first trying to figure out what CoC to use (under pressure from
    clients) I also considered secular sources, such as Benjamin
    Franklin's 13 virtues (http://www.thirteenvirtues.com/) but ended up
    going with the Instruments of Good Works from St. Benedict's Rule as
    it provide more examples.

    Secondly, I view a CoC not so much as a legal code as a statement of
    the values of the core developers. All current committers to SQLite
    approved the CoC before I published it. A single dissent would have
    been sufficient for me to change course. Taking down the current CoC
    would not change our values, it would merely obscure them. Isn't it
    better to be open and honest about who we are?

    Thirdly, having a written CoC is increasingly a business requirement.
    (I published the currrent CoC after two separate business requested
    copies of our company CoC. They did not say this was a precondition
    for doing business with them, but there was that implication.) There
    has been an implicit code of conduct for SQLite from the beginning,
    and almost everybody has gotten along with it just fine. Once or
    twice I have had to privately reprove offenders, but those are rare
    exceptions. Publishing the current CoC back in February is merely
    making explicit what has been implicit from the beginning. Nothing
    has really changed. I did not draw attention to the CoC back in
    February because all I really needed then was a hyperlink to send to
    those who were specifically curious.

    So then, why not use a more modern CoC? I looked at that too, but
    found the so-called "modern" CoCs to be vapid. They are trendy
    feel-good statements that do not really get to the heart of the matter
    in the way the the ancient Rule does. By way of analogy, I view
    modern CoCs as being like pop music - selling millions of copies today
    and completely forgotten next year. I prefer something more enduring,
    like Mozart.

    One final reason for publishing the current CoC is as a preemptive
    move, to prevent some future customer from imposing on us one of those
    modern CoCs that I so dislike.

    In summary: The values expressed by the current CoC have been
    unchanged for decades and will not be changing as we move forward. If
    some people are uncomfortable with those values, then I am very sorry
    for them, but that does not change the fact. On the other hand, I am
    open to suggestions on how to express those values in a way that
    modern twitter-ites can better understand, so do not hesitate to speak
    up if you have a plan.
    And a voice came out of the throne, saying, Praise our God, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great. (Revelation 19.5)
    Amend your ways: https://biblehub.com/kjv/john/1.htm

    Leave a comment:


  • Sheshbazzar
    replied
    Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy View Post
    The SqLite project just added one as well and this is some class A trolling: https://www.sqlite.org/codeofconduct.html
    Trolling? O you benighted chimpanzee...

    Leave a comment:


  • rabcor
    replied
    Originally posted by DanL View Post

    Sigh...
    My point ->
    Your head: (☭ ͜ʖ ☭)

    What a shithead you are, if you read further you'd see I have actually no problem with her being a woman, it's just that when it comes to SJW matters, women are significantly likelier to be on their side, than on the sane, or neutral sides. And you had to be a dick about it and nitpick at 2 lines instead of reading the entire thing for context.

    To give you the full context of that line...

    "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 wasn't condemning her for being a woman, I was just saying that her being a woman gives us worse chances of her being a neutral entity than if she were a man in this specific context. It's more of a statistical thing than anything, I'm not really saying a man would be better, they would just give slightly better odds in this context. What is needed is a neutral, and hard to influence entity.

    What we need is not this woman, what we need is good old Linus Torvalds, who has always been fair, if slightly heavy handed, at least he has been neutral, with a clear goal of keeping the quality of the kernel top notch, with everything else as secondary. Which is the entire point of this project, without that man holding the reins, I'm afraid it will collapse.
    Last edited by rabcor; 22 October 2018, 04:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BeardedGNUFreak
    replied
    Originally posted by Dedale View Post
    I confess i have skipped entire pages of this thread...

    So pardon me to if this is a repost but https://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-is-back-in-charge-of-linux/

    Jesus is back !
    The SJWs are having a complete meltdown.

    Just a few weeks ago they were shouting with glee that they had finally hijacked Linux.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dedale
    replied
    I confess i have skipped entire pages of this thread...

    So pardon me to if this is a repost but https://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-is-back-in-charge-of-linux/

    Jesus is back !

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X