Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Announces GNU Kind Communication Guidelines

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

  • #81
    Originally posted by dstaubsauger View Post


    I went back to my original post and your first reply. You said that you can accept and respect trans people and address them as male/female like they want to be addressed. I believe you that you meant that. What i'm trying to point out is that sarcastic comments like "or is their name fluid as well" may unnecessarily hit a hurtful point for the same people.
    The point was, very succinctly, that the introduction of their orientation of sex, gender or anything OTHER than sticking to the project's objectives or the subject under discussion are TOTALLY AND UTTERLY unwarranted. You're predominantly dealing with people over email, internal communication like irc so why is there even a mention of these things? They are totally irrelevant and don't belong in a software project. And yet they come up.

    For example, a while back on a software project, person states "i have a child i can't do X this week, in future consider that before requesting X". Why? Just state you're busy. I don't give a damn about your nuclear family. I don't even give a damn if you're male/female/whatever, just do your assigned role - can't do it, hand it off to someone else.

    Don't introduce such information. The world's becoming full of snow-flakes & thin-skinned lefties... i must have just violated a myriad of cocs just then.


    Originally posted by dstaubsauger View Post
    ​​​​​​what is the word "that" referring to here?)
    The fact things get easily confused in emails/text and people can misinterpret anything, even more so if they wish to maliciously.

    Originally posted by dstaubsauger View Post
    es, they do. However, i do believe that it is legitimate and efficient for a discussion forum to have rules (and if it's only to keep the discussion on-topic). This is not some country's government telling everyone what to say and believe. If i look at the list of things that the contributor covenant (which seems to be the most controversial of the CoCs) explicitly forbids, i can't imagine of anything on that list being desirable in a discussion of open source software anyway.


    CoCs don't forbid things just because a random single person was offended by at some point.


    I did read the linux one and the freebsd one. You mean that the lists of "bad things" sometimes seem arbitrary?
    Jeez that's tame compared to the freebsd one.

    i suspect the fun is fast going out of open source where every word you write will be scrutinized by those who want to be a victim. It might just end up either being ignored totally (a good thing) or ending some projects.

    when freebsd was requesting comments on their proposal people were gagged and/or banned from the discussion - and not because they were being obnoxious - but moreover because it was a faite-accompli and the 'discussion' was for show.

    and yes cocs do forbid things if some random individual is offended, that's one of the main points of these dictates.
    Last edited by Bsdisbetter; 10-26-2018, 04:32 AM. Reason: auto correct tablet crap.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      The point was, very succinctly, that the introduction of their orientation of sex, gender or anything OTHER than sticking to the project's objectives or the subject under discussion are TOTALLY AND UTTERLY unwarranted.
      Believe it or not, FreeBSD Code of Conduct agrees with you on that
      We want the FreeBSD Project to be a venue where people of all backgrounds can work together to make the best operating system,
      (it then goes on to list all the things that are considered harassment and therefore have no place in the discussion)

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      You're predominantly dealing with people over email, internal communication like irc so why is there even a mention of these things? They are totally irrelevant and don't belong in a software project. And yet they come up.
      Yes they do. From your perspective, they came up with the introduction of CoCs. For some other people, they've come up all their lives, when they were being told like "girls cant do math", being called fags or whatever. They invented CoCs because they were sick of it.

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      For example, a while back on a software project, person states "i have a child i can't do X this week, in future consider that before requesting X".
      Ok last part is actually rude.

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      The world's becoming full of snow-flakes & thin-skinned lefties...
      What do you want the world to be full of?

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      i must have just violated a myriad of cocs just then.
      I was about to say that since we are on the phoronix forums, you haven't because we don't have a CoC here, but then i looked it up and actually we sort of do have one
      https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...59-forum-rules
      (Just to be clear, i don't think you have broken any of those rules either, and since we're not working on a concrete project here or anything, i think it's a good thing to have this discussion as openly as it is right now.)

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      The fact things get easily confused in emails/text and people can misinterpret anything, even more so if they wish to maliciously.
      It's true that emails/text has greater potential for misunderstanding. I argue that, especially since we know that, we should attempt try to write in a way that we assume is less likely to offend the person we are talking to, unless of course we actually do want to offend them.

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      i suspect the fun is fast going out of open source where every word you write will be scrutinized by those who want to be a victim.
      While there are probably people who grew unhealthily attached to that role, there *are* people who are victims out there, and i can't blame them for recognizing harrassment. If we really have to write down the rules in order for everyone to behave, so be it. Also, i don't believe the fun we're all having with free software is going to be less because we're not being rude.

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      when freebsd was requesting comments on their proposal people were gagged and/or banned from the discussion - and not because they were being obnoxious - but moreover because it was a faite-accompli and the 'discussion' was for show.
      I wasn't aware of that, can you give examples of constructive criticism being banned?

      Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
      and yes cocs do forbid things if some random individual is offended, that's one of the main points of these dictates.
      It takes an actual violation of a written rule and confirmation by a committee for sanctions to be imposed on somebody. It's not like the discussion goes "oh hey, so that other person offends me by existing, pls ban them kthx" - "ok *ban*".

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post
        I like Stallman's approach. Sensible, non-authoritarian and appealing to people's better selves. A simple, yet very elegant document. No need for punitive committees. No divisive language. I hope this spreads far and wide.
        Keep in mind that Richard Milhous Stallman does not follow these guidelines himself. He is arguing in bad faith to save face with a certain demographic as even a shallow perusal of his site shows that he doesn't care about using divisive language.

        Comment


        • #84
          In the latest development, he has announced “GNU Kind Communications Guidelines.” The initial version of the guidelines is available online and Stallman has requested the GNU contributors to follow them tutuapp.

          Comment

          Working...
          X