FreeBSD Finally Gets Mitigated For Spectre & Meltdown

[Brisse]

That depends on your definition of a decent person. Some people have very particular standards when it comes to this, it basically boils down to "anyone who hold values different from my own is not a decent person". This quickly turns a technical project into another popularity contest with a lot of unwritten as well as written rules that can get you to end up in the outgroup - basically turning the whole thing into an environment not dissimilar to large corporations or school. This is not conducive to freedom of thought and I don't believe it's an attractive environment for hackers since it's very hard to navigate. It is also incredibly inhumane.

Bullies are not decent folks, that's for sure.

[lisa_arrowwood]

Just try to be a decent person and there's pretty much zero risk of you ending up on the receiving end.

I understand the strong reactions. This is unbelievably vile and nauseating to read.

There have been only four serious cases of abuse in the open source world in the past few years:

* node.js Two cases of SJWs attacking a developer who did absolutely nothing with them or had any interactions with them. They simply were guilty of 'wrong think' in the vile minds of the attacking SJWs.

* drupal One case with SJWs digging into a developers private life and doxing him and then trying to have him kicked from the project for some ridiculous CoC violation

* freebsd Randi Harper attacking a developer who had no interactions with her because she didn't like his politics

That's it.

So this insulting notion that anyone other than these sick in the head and dangerous SJWs need to 'behave' shouldn't even dignify a response.

If all that wasn't bad enough, Randi Harper's supporter in the freebsd project is some creepy guy named Colin Percival. He is one of the main people responsible for pushing this toxic freebsd CoC.

If that isn't disgusting irony, I don't know what is.

[lisa_arrowwood]

That depends on your definition of a decent person. Some people have very particular standards when it comes to this, it basically boils down to "anyone who hold values different from my own is not a decent person". This quickly turns a technical project into another popularity contest with a lot of unwritten as well as written rules that can get you to end up in the outgroup - basically turning the whole thing into an environment not dissimilar to large corporations or school. This is not conducive to freedom of thought and I don't believe it's an attractive environment for hackers since it's very hard to navigate. It is also incredibly inhumane.

You make it sound like some sort of theoretical 'might happen' discussion.

This just happened in the past year with node.js and a similar toxic CoC:

1. Developer posts link on his personal social media to an article discussing the dangers of CoCs

2. SJWs patrolling his social media for wrong think go ballistic and try to have him kicked from the project

3. Community is having nothing of it and point out blatant CoC violations by the SJWs attacking the developer

4. SJW node team member goes on sickening sexists attack against the entire reddit node community

5. She is mass reported to the node team by huge numbers of people for huge numbers of CoC violations

6. This was the response from the node team:

https://archive.is/YnGGz

So, no, this isn't some theoretical discussion. This could happen tomorrow to any one of us.

[nils_]

Bullies are not decent folks, that's for sure.

Again, subjective. Take the example of Randi Harper, was she a bully, was she bullied or was it perhaps a bit of both?

[BeardedGNUFreak]

The Randi Harper/Colin Percival harassment incident is unbelievable and the FreeBSD team deserves to have the open source world laughing at them in ridicule and masses of developers making it clear that want nothing to do with the dumpster fire that is FreeBSD.

Remember everyone - you just need to 'behave' and you will be 'safe' from being attacked by SJWs and their toxic CoC...

Colin Percival brought Randi Harper into the FreeBSD project.
Randi Harper read something she didn't like on a FreeBSD team members social media.
She attacked him and then cried harassment and tried to have him kicked from FreeBSD.
The FreeBSD wouldn't kick him and she was eventually kicked from the project.
Randi Harper and Colin Percival were furious she was kicked.
Colin Percival spent the next year or so working behind the scenes without any community involvement to get this toxic CoC forced upon the FreeBSD community.
The new toxic CoC has classic Cultural Marxism garbage codifying Operessors and Victims with the CoC only applying to Operessors - aka White Males
He now has manged to get a CoC that can be used as a weapon against ideological enemies and can never again be used to kick or punish the wrong people like with what happened to his vile friend Randi Harper.

So, yeah, absolutely nothing to worry about being involved with the FreeBSD project.

[k1l_]

So? That's nothing of meaning. Just consider it small print and get over it. Why does it matter? Somebody doesn't want you to send then "virtual hugs" then don't do it... I don't get the problem... Are you gonna send them just to piss them off in that case? What"s the problem exactly?

You cant not-offend someone who wants to be offended. That is the point. And that is the issue with the SJW CoC. And that is the issue with SJWs as such.
And i dont know why you make it look like the critics of the SJW CoC is only a bunch of right wing Trump fans, that want to legally harass everyone on the internet. This is a very foul play, very common for SJWs.
Just to make it clear again: there was already a CoC that worked. It did not work for the SJWs, so they pushed a new SJW CoC behind closed doors.

[Brisse]

Again, subjective. Take the example of Randi Harper, was she a bully, was she bullied or was it perhaps a bit of both?

No, not subjective. Bullying as defined by Wikipedia:

Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others. The behavior is often repeated and habitual. One essential prerequisite is the perception, by the bully or by others, of an imbalance of social or physical power, which distinguishes bullying from conflict.^[1] Behaviors used to assert such domination can include verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion, and such acts may be directed repeatedly towards particular targets. Rationalizations of such behavior sometimes include differences of social class, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, appearance, behavior, body language, personality, reputation, lineage, strength, size, or ability.^[2][3][4] If bullying is done by a group, it is called mobbing.

Does that sound like something a decent person would do? It's not rational to think so.

Also, when did I ever deny that earlier mentioned person was not a bully? She was kicked in the end, no? I'd imagine you would see that as a victory, so why even bring it up? Because you think with the new CoC someone could just throw empty allegations and it will have consequences? That's not how it works. There still has to be some sort of proof before consequences can be handed out.

[Brisse]

So, yeah, absolutely nothing to worry about

True, sans the sarcasm.

[Brisse]

Oh crap, now the forum is holding back one of my replies again

Guess you can come back and read it next week or something.

[k1l_]

…
Just try to be a decent person and there's pretty much zero risk of you ending up on the receiving end. Anyone that eventually does probably deserves it. Is it a little much to go into such detail about "virtual hugs"? Perhaps, but I don't see how it's any more open for abuse than the previous CoC which was very unclear and you could basically make up any excuse for/against which just leads into infinite loops of allegations vs. counter-allegations and nothing good comes from it in the end.

And why does it always have to come down to this "us vs. them" rhetoric? Try to see things a bit more objective instead of picking sides and going to war all emotional. The very same arguments you come up with can easily be used to the same effect by your opposition.
…

You are missing one very important point: the SJWs have a decent track record of doing the exact thing you say it will never happen: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918 So why are you only seeing good faith in the SJW and only see bad faith in the SJW CoC critics?
You are making critics look like they just want to harass everyone. Which is not the case. There was already a CoC. But it was not a free ride ticket for the SJW like it is now.