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

[Sheshbazzar]

Wow, that's some mighty delusion of grandeur you have. Your logic looks a whole lot like a gordian knot, you can draw it, but you can't actually make one in the real world. Time will tell.....

Laughable, the loophole is easy: just read it. As to the faggots' pederasty, there are peer-reviewed papers about it. Shall we quote them or would this "offensive behavior" incur the CoC's "lenient" retribution?

[duby229]

Hey smarty pants, it turns out that their "CoC" demands its own abolition. To begin with, the "CoC" itself doesn't escape its scope, for according to the same "CoC":


The "CoC", being spread in public spaces as, ostensibly, a "representation" of, among others, the Linux developer community, is subjected to itself. Indeed, said "representation" uses an official project e-mail:



As per the above statute, harassment is deemed not aligned to the "CoC", neither is any threat:



But it so happens that is a blatant threat of harassment. Of course the "CoC" itself is a threat if it is a law at all.

Hence this "CoC" transgresses this "CoC". If it is not de jure destroyed by itself (the "CoC" compels the "maintainers" to permaban themselves, taking said "CoC" with them) then it is weak, laxity obtains and nobody need pay attention to it, de facto destroying it, which is the better case, as nobody has hitherto pointed out this obvious loophole. On the other hand, this silence could betray a real blindness or "rigorous" discharge on the repressive apparatus' part (clearly offensive hence not rigorous in avoiding a contradiction with the "CoC"), which may reflect pretty badly on the Linux kernel's code quality, architecture, *merit*...

Somebody tell this to the Linux developers, who aren't that wise it would appear.

Wow, that's some mighty delusion of grandeur you have. Your logic looks a whole lot like a gordian knot, you can draw it, but you can't actually make one in the real world. Time will tell.....

[duby229]

What about "openness", which includes tolerance towards intolerant, recalcitrant and straight males? (Intolerant men, however, should keep their well founded prejudice against falsely tolerant faggotic abominations) Faggots are illogical. Again, the "CoC" is a female pit, without force, constantly breached, chiefly by its proponents. This is of course as it should be for aren't LGBT++ *hermaphroditic* pedophiles*?

They say "Maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good faith **may face temporary or permanent repercussions** as determined by other members of the project’s leadership" (CoC) but then, since they don't *cut* their CoC out (for reasons expounded in a previous post), they neither follow (on its way out) neither enforce (by kicking said CoC in its unballs) it, they must "face temporary or permanent repercussions" according to their CoC...

* Allow me to explain the matter with philosophical flourish: they spoke, wrote i.e., 0) *begat* the "CoC", which "CoC", being *their progeny*, reflects them, is a property or quality of theirs, witnesses or speaks about them, to summarize they *are* (taken in the sense of predication as in "this *is* a predication") the CoC. They transgress the CoC which they nonetheless aren't abolishing, the very CoC that says about itself that it is illegal. Thus it is that the LGBT's pedophilia and hermaphroditism reveal themselves also in this their *production*, confirming 0), namely that one is judged by his fruits, which is Jesus Christ's meritocracy and in direct opposition to the CoC: they, how shall we say, "breach" themselves in their CoC "child", it being so shallow as to permit even their impotent selves to "transgress" it. (The CoC collapses under its own *lightness*).

Oh boy.... Bat shit crazy....

[duby229]

I'm wrong once you counter my arguments, not by attacking me on a personal level.

It wasn't an attack. I did'nt call any names or or make up bullshit aimed at you, all I did give you an honest assessment. If you can spit out SJW as much as you do at people who have no affiliation with them, then that is honestly reflective of your prejudice. I'm not trying to call names or make up bullshit, just giving you an honest assessment. You spit SJW the same way white supremacists spit the N word.

[duby229]

It's still a marxist political statement, and it has absolutely *zero* place in open source, ever.

You do realize that marx wasn't exactly wrong... Opinionated as hell and undereducated, but not wrong.. Serious economists arestarting to come to terms with a few of his predictions.

EDIT: You should actually read the communist manifesto. What it does NOT do is define communism.... What it does DO is bitch extensively about capitalism. It does not define an alternative to capitalism, but is mostly correct about it's problems with it.

[FireBurn]

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

[MilesBHuff]

There are some typos in that. Is it too late to report them? How would I go about doing so?

[dungeon]

Shut the fuck up you couple of retards.

And there it goes harassment free harassment

[Shevchen]

You can be prejudiced if you want and you can stereotype people amyway you want, but don't you see that's what makes you wrong.

I'm wrong once you counter my arguments, not by attacking me on a personal level.

[Sheshbazzar]

This after the worst display of hatred and desire for inequality in this whole fucking thread.... Pot meet Kettle....

What about "openness", which includes tolerance towards intolerant, recalcitrant and straight males? (Intolerant men, however, should keep their well founded prejudice against falsely tolerant faggotic abominations) Faggots are illogical. Again, the "CoC" is a female pit, without force, constantly breached, chiefly by its proponents. This is of course as it should be for aren't LGBT++ *hermaphroditic* pedophiles*?

They say "Maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good faith **may face temporary or permanent repercussions** as determined by other members of the project’s leadership" (CoC) but then, since they don't *cut* their CoC out (for reasons expounded in a previous post), they neither follow (on its way out) neither enforce (by kicking said CoC in its unballs) it, they must "face temporary or permanent repercussions" according to their CoC...

* Allow me to explain the matter with philosophical flourish: they spoke, wrote i.e., 0) *begat* the "CoC", which "CoC", being *their progeny*, reflects them, is a property or quality of theirs, witnesses or speaks about them, to summarize they *are* (taken in the sense of predication as in "this *is* a predication") the CoC. They transgress the CoC which they nonetheless aren't abolishing, the very CoC that says about itself that it is illegal. Thus it is that the LGBT's pedophilia and hermaphroditism reveal themselves also in this their *production*, confirming 0), namely that one is judged by his fruits, which is Jesus Christ's meritocracy and in direct opposition to the CoC: they, how shall we say, "breach" themselves in their CoC "child", it being so shallow as to permit even their impotent selves to "transgress" it. (The CoC collapses under its own *lightness*).