Closed Is the community become fragile?

Status
Not open for further replies.
drhowarddrfine said:
Again I say, this "movement" started with Linux so what are you moving to?

Another question, in what way is any of this directly affecting you?
Click to expand...
Well, I been using dragonFly and I like that...but I screwed up my install doing stuff with hammer that I didn't understand. I have always like OpenBSD but have all nvidia cards otherwise it would be that.

As for how it effects me...it more personal, I guess. As a person who probably classified as one in the groups "being protected" it irrated the f**** out of me that I can see people obviously trying to figure out how to talk to me without offending me and it really seems to me like pandering. It also seems to cause more problem than it solves and since I'm close to 50 and been in this industry for 20+ years, I really can't figure out where all these young people getting offended are coming from. It seems more to me that people are assuming they are being criticised from being a women or a majority than the actual fact that you might just be an a**hole or you code just might not be any good. I have seen it first hand and that hate that more than anything else. I could go on and on with this tract but I irrates me and probably will become inchoerrent and move away from FreeBSD's CoC. I think it boils down to you can't legislate compassion toward others it just ends up doing the opposite.
 
roddierod said:
It seems more to me that people are assuming they are being criticised from being a women or a majority than the actual fact that you might just be an a**hole or you code just might not be any good. I have seen it first hand and that hate that more than anything else.
Click to expand...

It's not the case at FreeBSD. That's a problem at Wikia's sister projects. They have a reputation for chasing women off, and they have tried to do damage control by making phony baloney rules, which have no merit or sincere backing. FreeBSD is making the mistake of taking their rules seriously enough to base their guidelines off of a community which has those rampant problems.
 
Summary of the FreeBSD CoC:
  • Don't be an asshat.
  • If other people are behaving like asshats towards you or other members of the community then don't put up with it: you can report it via the listed channels.

If anyone has a problem with this then I strongly suspect that the project is better off without them. I, for one, write better code when I don't have to waste time dealing with asshats.
 
Only thing I can add to David's reply is that the CoC also reinforces the due process we already had in the project. As someone who has handled dozens of personality conflicts over the years, I can state that whoever said there is "no recourse" for the accused is full of it. The hours of debate, analysis and fact finding that goes into every single case where both sides are heard and treated fairly shows there's no rush to judgement or knee-jerk reactions. I'd be very interested to hear of a specific instance where that happened. So far, I just hear vague handwaving that doesn't really speak to the facts in the past. That's not to say things were handled perfectly in the past (they weren't, and the framework sucked to prevent abuse which is why the changes to it over the years). But to say there's no recourse once there was an accusation was and is total bullshit.
 
Cthulhux said:
Seeing that you seem to be a representative of the FreeBSD Project, can we assume that this means that FreeBSD is no longer a community-driven project?
Click to expand...

The project remains community driven. The community complained about this behavior, so it is now spelled out as not allowed. If you are part of the small minority of folks that have a problem with behaving decently, then please leave or learn to behave decently. You will make the community as a whole better.
 
David Chisnall said:
I, for one, write better code when I don't have to waste time dealing with asshats.
Click to expand...
Except to quote the carton "every innovation in the past decade comes from Solaris". FreeBSD has very little code to show for. Actually just deleting lot of code would be a great start. If the community was not offended by the people like Matt Dillon who actually know what they are doing maybe FreeBSD would at least have HAMMER instead of being "basically just an OS to build proprietary appliances" which is "run by corporations".
 
If calling other participants "asshats" is not considered harassment, I wonder where harassment starts.
But I can find other points from that precious Code of Conduct:
  • Sustained disruption of discussion: I'm pretty sure that calling me an "asshat" is quite disruptive.
  • Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease: You just violated that.
  • Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person: I am guaranteed to not be an asshat.
Are you the one to expel yourself from the project or do the rules not apply to the team?
 
Cthulhux said:
If calling other participants "asshats" is not considered harassment, I wonder where harassment starts.
But I can find other points from that precious Code of Conduct:
  • Sustained disruption of discussion: I'm pretty sure that calling me an "asshat" is quite disruptive.
  • Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease: You just violated that.
  • Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person: I am guaranteed to not be an asshat.
Are you the one to expel yourself from the project or do the rules not apply to the team?
Click to expand...

I don't know. You've not shown a strong case here. Setting boundaries isn't disruptive to the conversation. You are posting to a public forum, so the one on one communication doesn't apply (and I've not PM'd you). I think a case could be made you are engaging in behavior a reasonable person might consider to be asshatty.

So without making a case, there's no point proceeding further. At this point I just ask you to have a nice day.
 
roddierod said:
... classified as one in the groups "being protected" ...
Click to expand...

This phrase alone makes-up for a different point of view.

My take on the CoC is that it protects everybody without exception equally well. Like anybody frequenting a space of the FreeBSD Project is required to obey the rules. This is not at all different from the laws in lawful countries, where everybody (without exception) is protected and everybody (without exception) is supposed to obey.

That the executive practice is here and there far less than ideal is another story. However, you don't want to change a descent law/rule because people are infringing it, you need to work on law/rule enforcement.

Back to the CoC, I belong to a mainstream group (self assessment), and I cannot find any single rule which incommodes me, neither as a human being in general, nor as a FreeBSD user in special.
 
sidetone said:
Please FreeBSD, make your own guidelines, and don't base yours off of Wikia's, whose problems are not inherent in the FreeBSD community.
Click to expand...
The problem is when they'd dare to attempt to step back, they'll be accused of racist, misogynic, reactionary whatever "rollback"...
This "safe space" ideology is a vicious cycle that gets worse and worse, can only end in fanatism.
We in Germany had enough of this and it is so sad how the freedom the Americans we always admired gets thrown away by themselves :(
roddierod said:
As for how it effects me...it more personal, I guess. As a person who probably classified as one in the groups "being protected" it irrated the f**** out of me that I can see people obviously trying to figure out how to talk to me without offending me and it really seems to me like pandering. [...] I think it boils down to you can't legislate compassion toward others it just ends up doing the opposite.
Click to expand...
I can only second this.
I am disabled. I feel bad when people use euphemisms like "challenged" or whatever.
People who try to attempt not to hurt me, not to make me feel offended, actually do the opposite, making me feel even more alien.
[Edit: I have to emphasize, they do not make me feel offended, they just make me feel bad]

This way they conceal their feeling of superiority, telling me that I am outsider, making me feeling really bad.

And what's even worse, when I tell these typical do-gooders that such makes feel me bad, they often feel offended.
(It was the worst on occasions when I had to defend people who honestly called me "disabled", and the do-gooders who don't know the reality of disabled people actually got angry...)
(I hope I didn't offend you. This is not my intention. I am not sure, and very hesitant, whether I just should stay quiet to not offend anybody. So I proactively apologize...)
 
bsdimp said:
Only thing I can add to David's reply is that the CoC also reinforces the due process we already had in the project. As someone who has handled dozens of personality conflicts over the years, I can state that whoever said there is "no recourse" for the accused is full of it. The hours of debate, analysis and fact finding that goes into every single case where both sides are heard and treated fairly shows there's no rush to judgement or knee-jerk reactions. I'd be very interested to hear of a specific instance where that happened. So far, I just hear vague handwaving that doesn't really speak to the facts in the past. That's not to say things were handled perfectly in the past (they weren't, and the framework sucked to prevent abuse which is why the changes to it over the years). But to say there's no recourse once there was an accusation was and is total bullshit.
Click to expand...

John Marino was the specific latest incident I was thinking of. From my read of all the matterials made public someone accussed him, the project took that persons side and removed John's permissions when he asked for clarification and example of what he did wrong, and clarification was basically "you know what you did, you were told". Now that's a simplification.

From the outside, the situation seem akin to your telling someone to stop being an asshat later in this thread...change asshat to "girlie" and it would be a entire different kettle of fish, except apparently you wrote the rule so it's ok
 
David Chisnall said:
Summary of the FreeBSD CoC:
  • Don't be an asshat.
  • If other people are behaving like asshats towards you or other members of the community then don't put up with it: you can report it via the listed channels.

If anyone has a problem with this then I strongly suspect that the project is better off without them. I, for one, write better code when I don't have to waste time dealing with asshats.
Click to expand...
I agree, with exceptions that emphasis on gender should be removed, then be replaced with people tell you what name they want to be called, and for FreeBSD to make guidelines that are not based on another project with inherent faults it is trying to address, which haven't been the issue here.
 
Snurg said:
J
I can only second this.
I am disabled. I feel bad when people use euphemisms like "challenged" or whatever.
People who try to attempt not to hurt me, not to make me feel offended, actually do the opposite, making me feel even more alien.
[Edit: I have to emphasize, they do not make me feel offended, they just make me feel bad]

This way they conceal their feeling of superiority, telling me that I am outsider, making me feeling really bad.

And what's even worse, when I tell these typical do-gooders that such makes feel me bad, they often feel offended.
(It was the worst on occasions when I had to defend people who honestly called me "disabled", and the do-gooders who don't know the reality of disabled people actually got angry...)
(I hope I didn't offend you. This is not my intention. I am not sure, and very hesitant, whether I just should stay quiet to not offend anybody. So I proactively apologize...)
Click to expand...

Thank you, this is how I feel bad not offended, I've had the same type of experiences with regards to me saying black and being corrected because that's offensive.
 
roddierod said:
John Marino was the specific latest incident I was thinking of. From my read of all the matterials made public someone accussed him, the project took that persons side and removed John's permissions when he asked for clarification and example of what he did wrong, and clarification was basically "you know what you did, you were told". Now that's a simplification.

From the outside, the situation seem akin to your telling someone to stop being an asshat later in this thread...change asshat to "girlie" and it would be a entire different kettle of fish, except apparently you wrote the rule so it's ok
Click to expand...

He had due process and recourse. There were extensive discussions, back and forth, with everybody involved over a period of weeks. This is clear from the public information, as well as my inside knowledge. However, in the end he chose to paint himself as a victim in public. That's his right, I suppose, but isn't a true reflection of what happened.

Calling someone an asshat is rude and insensitive. True. Fully cop to that. However, 'asshat' doesn't have the same connotations as other things do, so let's not create a false moral equivalency to justify being upset at some hypocrisy that doesn't exist.

Having said that, if you honestly feel there's a legitimate case here, please feel free to screenshot and submit this to CoC board. I'm not above the law.
 
As so many I also have no love lost for SJW, because in several cases they seriously show themselves for what they are: complete idiots. Reminds me of an article I read about the word black. It's obviously a total insult to mention black people. However, wasn't it Martin Luther King himself who used the word as something to be clearly proud off?

Now, back to this CoC. I don't see anything wrong with it to be honest. And I'm also worried that some of you pick up the CoC with other examples in mind, examples which may not even apply at all. The obvious "guilty until proven innocence" approach doesn't have to apply here.

Basically I think it's important to act based on actual mishaps instead of a set of rules which only make you fear that something like that can happen. Sure, there's definitely something as being oversensitive and the need to grow a clue sometimes, but there's also something as respecting others.

Quite frankly I think most of what is being mentioned in that CoC has no place within a technical environment at all.

At best I see the CoC as an ensured way that the FreeBSD project won't dive down into the depths that is the Linux kernel mailinglist where it's apparently perfectly acceptable to call people out and fling personal insults at them, even if it's only because you didn't agree with what they had to say.
 
Snurg said:
The problem is when they'd dare to attempt to step back, they'll be accused of racist, misogynic, reactionary whatever "rollback"...
This "safe space" ideology is a vicious cycle that gets worse and worse, can only end in fanatism.
We in Germany had enough of this and it is so sad how the freedom the Americans we always admired gets thrown away by themselves :(
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're talking about. Nobody is going to get on anyone's case for rewriting rules from scratch, and replacing them with less emphasis on particular points that are not inherent problems here. FreeBSD shouldn't overcompensate for another community's inherent problems; because they are guilty of it, we are not.

If someone says their name is Jane, then call them Jane. I disagree with someone being Joe for the first decades of their life, then claiming they are Jane, then insisting they never be called Joe, but it is simple as they say their name is Jane. I will call them whichever I feel like when I'm not around them, but to interact with them, I call them the name they say they want to be called. For the name of a group, I don't care about which title they want to be called. But if an individual says, this is my name/pseudonym, then that's what a forum goes by.

I've seen your posts drift off from software to political racism or against people of religion, while comments should be more or less on topic.

cynwulf said:
The CoC seems like pretentious, politcally correct bilge... but perhaps it's just the wording. I'm pretty much on the fence.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is the wording, and the emphasis.
 
sidetone said:
So it's the emphasis on misgendering/dead names that I disagree with. I treat people with respect, even if I don't agree with what they do, or don't understand why anyone would want to change the identity they were born as.
Click to expand...
You raise a good point but be aware of one important detail: deliberate misgendering. It's not just misgendering here, but deliberately using certain terms of which you can know that the other person doesn't like it. Quite frankly I think it's sensible. Heck, why would you even bring gender into tech stuff anyway?

But I do think the deliberate part is an important one here.
 
ShelLuser said:
You raise a good point but be aware of one important detail: deliberate misgendering. It's not just misgendering here, but deliberately using certain terms of which you can know that the other person doesn't like it. Quite frankly I think it's sensible. Heck, why would you even bring gender into tech stuff anyway?

But I do think the deliberate part is an important one here.
Click to expand...
It should be deliberate mislabeling as a whole, not misgendering.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top