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

  • #21
    Originally posted by Dedale View Post

    What trap ? Is it desirable to look "inclusive" ? This "inclusive" stuff looks like it comes from Mounty Python's Life Of Brian. The "Man woman and hermaphrodite" passage at the end when Brian is on the cross.
    They included a Code of Conduct at all (and the Contributor Covenant, no less), thus they want to appear inclusive. I'm not making judgments on the worth of inclusiveness, just noting what has been done.

    Comment


    • #22
      As long as "Linux Kernel Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation" do not mention anything about meritocracy, as a good thing from the first place, nothing can be done.
      Actually whole construction of this Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct started by attacking meritocracy as a fundamental concept, because would have stood in the way of minorities.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by BwackNinja View Post

        They included a Code of Conduct at all (and the Contributor Covenant, no less), thus they want to appear inclusive. I'm not making judgments on the worth of inclusiveness, just noting what has been done.
        I get it. thank you for clarification.
        Last edited by Dedale; 10-20-2018, 04:01 PM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by duby229 View Post
          Maybe it's the area and culture I grew up in, I didn't think people could have masculinity complexes this bad, but here I am reading this thread....
          Don't worry, you're not alone. And this is coming from someone who spent 14 years in a Catholic boys school.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by etam View Post
            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.
            Only a miner or cryptocurrency speculant would mention above. While I agree with the sentiment in general (and that law should never work backwards), I welcome the interpretation in question as it deters people from mining, which I consider as pure energy wasting.
            This is offtopic however.

            Comment


            • #26
              Read and and weap, incels ... hehe

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by reavertm View Post

                Only a miner or cryptocurrency speculant would mention above. While I agree with the sentiment in general (and that law should never work backwards), I welcome the interpretation in question as it deters people from mining, which I consider as pure energy wasting.
                This is offtopic however.
                What better way to represent wealth than by overconsumption of energy right?

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Naib View Post
                  Or the maintainers of the Contributors covenant not acting on man hating
                  https://github.com/ContributorCovena...ant/issues/278
                  Oh that's a really nice one!

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by geearf View Post

                    Oh that's a really nice one!
                    where's the original post you quoted? I dont see it in this thread...

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by euler271 View Post

                      where's the original post you quoted? I dont see it in this thread...
                      You can click on the little arrows on my quote, it'll get you there

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X