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

  • #91
    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 !

    Comment


    • #92
      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.

      Comment


      • #93
        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.

        Comment


        • #94
          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...

          Comment


          • #95


            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

            Comment


            • #96
              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.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by duby229 View Post

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

                Comment


                • #98
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • 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.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X