What do you think about OpenZFS's new CoC?

What is so bad about defining some ground rules so everyone plays together nicely? I don't follow the discussions but I don't really understand what the fuzz it about a list of rules like "don't insult each other" or "respect every person, regardless of gender or religion or whatever."
 
tommiie said:
What is so bad about defining some ground rules so everyone plays together nicely?
Click to expand...

Eh… Either everyone plays together nicely or they don't. CoCs are mostly symbolic.

tommiie said:
I don't follow the discussions but I don't really understand what the fuzz it about a list of rules like "don't insult each other" or "respect every person, regardless of gender or religion or whatever."
Click to expand...

What's the point of defining common sense?
 
shkhln said:
Either everyone plays together nicely or they don't. CoCs are mostly symbolic.
Click to expand...

True. Though if you have written rules you can kick them out based on those rules. If you don't have written rules, they can't state you can't kick them out as he didn't violate any written rules.

shkhln said:
What's the point of defining common sense?
Click to expand...
I agree, it all boils down to using common sense and respecting others. But that seems to be a problem, hence they started making codes of conduct.

If they are "mostly symbolic" and you're using "common sense" anyway, why would you be opposed to a written code of conduct?
 
tommiie said:
Though if you have written rules you can kick them out based on those rules. If you don't have written rules, they can't state you can't kick them out as he didn't violate any written rules.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure kicking people is a solved problem, otherwise such projects as OpenBSD and Dragonfly BSD wouldn't exist.

tommiie said:
If they are "mostly symbolic" and you're using "common sense" anyway, why would you be opposed to a written code of conduct?
Click to expand...

Am I? I consider them redundant and the premise behind them stupid. I didn't express any other opinions.
 
Quote: "In addition, harmful conduct outside these spaces that negatively impacts members of the OpenZFS community (e.g., making discriminatory or threatening statements against individuals or groups of people) may affect a person’s ability to participate in the OpenZFS community."

So they are trying to police areas which are not theirs.

I am so wishing to be wrong here, but the natural number of SJWs in any organisation is 1, and that is after all others got booted out.
 
Many years ago, I was sitting in my company's attorney's office with three other lawyers and this subject came up. The problem is people attempting to "regulate human behavior" which, iirc, is next to impossible. People will act as they are and no written formula can change that, though they may have been speaking from a legal standpoint.

The problem is, on the internet nowdays, everyone has a microphone and every internet crazy has a voice. It's a benefit and a curse.
 
Might just be for legal reasons or compliance with something. In my arrogant opinion, it's not the overly liberal people who made this necessary, but the jerks who thought it was OK to harass people who made this stuff become standard.

Everyone got very excited about the FreeBSD CoC. Have any of you been affected by it?
To paraphrase the comedian Bill Burr, there are a lot of things to worry about and this really isn't one of them. Especially as the number of people familiar with tech rises, there is less and less room for the technically proficient person who can't manage simple politeness, because there's a darn good chance that someone who can manage can code just as well as the jerk, and is also job hunting.
 
Being a baby boomer, when we couldn't meet someone (in my case, coz I'm ugly), we'd look at the personals. Everytime I see SJW, I think Single Jewish Woman, or, as I live in NYC, Straight Jewish Woman. I've actually never heard the term SJW save from a straight white male, which may just be my experience, but who knows?
 
A decades long local TV newsman, who I worked with also decades ago, hosted a popular local, daily public radio news interview hour for many years. He invited an also retired former news anchor to the show. iirc, he's 81 and she's 75. "You're looking good", he said. "So do you", she said.

The next day, in a weekly meeting they have, it was brought up that one of the female producers complained that his comment was sexist and he needed to watch it in the future. To which he immediately quit and walked out, never to be seen again. He is also refusing the "Lifetime achievement award" that was to be given to him in a couple of months at some big bash.

Good for him. He's an old-school journalist that I like and has an excellent reputation. He said he was humiliated that anyone would think he was some sort of "creep" and he wasn't going to put up with it.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
The problem is, on the internet nowdays, everyone has a microphone and every internet crazy has a voice. It's a benefit and a curse.
Click to expand...
Yes. Everybody has the right to speak his mind. That does not mean everybody else has a duty to listen to him, neither has anyone the right not to be offended. That would be the end of all progress, and that is what these CoCs are going at. And yes, the CoC of FreeBSD has affected me, because it is one more filter to pass for things I say. A CoC is for human behaviour what CCD cameras are for crime prevention.

Oh, and getopt
Without a CoC the OP and others are free to eloquently give you a piece of their mind, on the same level, without using a crystal ball scrying what will trigger any snowflake into tantrums worthy of a tired 4 year old.
 
getopt said:
In most cases organisations need provisions below the law level for being able to apply santions on those damaging the organisation or hurting others.
Click to expand...
In my day, we had CEOs and managers who would get together and determine that. Then take appropriate action. Didn't need any written rules. The values and visions of any organization are determined by those at the top. Everything then rolls downhill from there. That's why a Steve Jobs can walk into a floundering Apple and turn it around. It's why I could buy someone else's floundering restaurant and triple sales in a few months. To accomplish that, some people had to go and I let them go. I didn't need any words on paper to tell me that.
 
I think the CoC is a good idea. A small step in the right direction, of making software development more open to more people. And breaking a culture where the "most a**h***" person ends up winning technical debates, just because the other debaters are unwilling to descend to the gutter.

Will this transition be somewhat painful? Certainly. Over the last ~30 years, the open software (a.k.a. hacker) culture has built its own sociological interaction styles. And much of that is built on a cult of heroes, who are too often not just (or not at all) technical or intellectual heroes, but the loudest voice in the room. Quite a few bad technical decisions can be directly attributed to a dysfunctional interaction style, and CoCs such as this are fundamentally an attempt to get people to be well-behaved and reasonable in their interactions with other people. Where this contradicts existing power structures, the change will be painful.

Part of the pain this causes is that course corrections sometimes have to be done by over-steering. To correct the abuses of the past, we will sometimes swing too far to the other side. This can cause reasonable people to end up getting into a fight. I have one example in my circle of friends and colleagues, where two FOSS developers (I won't name names, but they are both very well known file system and storage developers, you would recognize both their names and their contributions) got into a virtual screaming match, and are now not on speaking terms. This is unfortunate, because it reduces the number of people available to work on open source software.

And it is sadly true that sometimes SJWs (no, I don't mean single/straight jewish women) will take the opportunity that creating CoCs opens up, and try to put unrelated concerns into there. I fully expect some day to see a CoC that demands that people only eat vegan food, or don't smoke, or install solar cells on their roofs. When this happens, we stop it. The fact that sometimes people try to abuse CoCs doesn't mean that they are inherently bad.
 
Oops. My nick is inspired from the movie Evil brain from spaces :eek: I didn't imply anything about myself.
 
badbrain said:
Oops. My nick is inspired from the movie Evil brain from spaces :eek: I didn't imply anything about myself.
Click to expand...
Well, my nickname comes from a clan of ruffnians who spend their time stealing, boozing and fighting. The worst thing I do from that set is sometimes a few beers. Judging someone by his nickname is as dumb as judging someone by his skin color.

Also I find most people I know who subscribe to SJW statutes to be high in cluster B disorders. And I simply do not agree to hand out weaponry to those who are highly likely to misuse it. Whoever has dealt with narcistic sociopaths will know what I mean.
 
badbrain said:

OpenZFS / ZFS On Linux Is Introducing A Code of Conduct To Encourage New Contributors - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com www.phoronix.com

Infected by the CoC virus: FreeBSD, Linux kernel and now OpenZFS.
Click to expand...

Well, if you don't have vivid visions, values, qualities inherently to yourself and the project, you need at least to create papers stating them, for psychological compensation.

What's next?
Click to expand...

At my (former) employer it also started with a "diversity" agenda. Next was that they fired most of the white males above 50.

tommiie said:
What is so bad about defining some ground rules so everyone plays together nicely?
Click to expand...

Indeed, you need these at a kindergarten, or other places where people are expected to just do time and be quiet.

scottro said:
Everyone got very excited about the FreeBSD CoC. Have any of you been affected by it?
To paraphrase the comedian Bill Burr, there are a lot of things to worry about and this really isn't one of them.
Click to expand...

Then look at it from a different viewpoint: cause and effect. You say, there is no problem with a CoC, because well-behavers would not be bothered by it. But then you also say, the CoC is necessary to "manage simple politeness", which clearly implies that there are "bad" people out there who don't "manage simple politeness".

In more than 30 years I have not seen these people. What I have seen is evil people - people who would conform to all the rules, but nevertheless would rip off their friends for some personal advantage. A CoC helps nothing about that.

So, I think, the "bad people" are just made by the CoC, in the sense of a closed loop or self fulfilling prophecy, with the logic: if there weren't "bad" people, then nobody would need a CoC, and now see how many of them are out there!

It is that thing about good and evil in the Tao-te-king: You create evil by defining good, and you create good by defining evil. Nothing of this is real (as the buddhists know), but it has a great influence on our lifes.
 
I'm going to give my 2 cents on this topic as well. I do this from the "old continent", where freedom of speech was invented long before a certain country claimed its invention.
It's a continent that has seen many ups and downs in regard to freedom, free speech and many other things. Yet still most people that live there are ignorant of its real value.

A CoC is policing free speech, which is by definition censorship. You might consider it a good thing if people can't say anything that offends other people, but consider that
censorship will always be abused. It will be abused to shut up the very proponents of said censorship. And by the time you understand this, it'll be too late.

There is nothing wrong with offending someone. There is something (socially) wrong with insulting someone. It's important to see the difference.
I can rightfully say that I have offended many people throughout my lifetime. This may sound strange to anyone, especially the ones having read my other posts. I don't
offend easily but I do do so, much of it on purpose.
You see, one thing that offends people a lot is when they're confronted with facts that go against what they believe. Humans have an instinctive defensive reaction to such
truths, to be offended by them. That is something left over from our caveman ancestors and I like to think that we're better than that.
This is where censorship comes from and that in turn is where things such as a CoC are born out of. It's all instinct against being hurt. But being proven wrong is the very first
step towards improvement.

For instance, I have had many people work with me throughout the years. When someone didn't do a good job, I told them. Many were offended by this. Most learned from it.
The ones that didn't, I told in sterner words. Thus, I offended them harder. All because I knew people wouldn't improve unless someone has the guts of telling the truth. There's no
point in explaining someone what they're doing wrong if they haven't accepted the simple fact that they're doing it wrong.

Of course it's easy to say that this "constructive offensive behaviour" should be allowed. But it's a very thin line between what e.g. Linus has told people and what I tell them.
And then we come to differences between humans. Some people are less adept at judging other peoples' sensitivities than others. That doesn't necessarily make them bad at
certain technical jobs. In fact, it's rather the opposite way. The most intelligent people are rarely the good communicators or the most empathic. It's just how brains are wired.
Do you really want to be surrounded by people who know how to say something, but don't necessarily know what they're actually saying? It only creates a bubble of ignorance,
a culture of good enough instead of excellence. It actually creates division and discourages diversity simply by removing people that do not conform.

A community thrives by having people of very different backgrounds, cultures and countries coming together to reach a goal. Removing valuable people from a project because
they use a wrong pronoun or something is simply ridiculous. What is trendy in one country, isn't an issue in another. Not all countries are the same. If you have to worry about
every possible sensitivity out there, I assure you, you won't type anything at all. You won't say anything ever. Simply because there's someone out there - either in the present
or the future - offended by exactly what you're about to type.

All in all: a CoC excludes people. It makes some people afraid to speak up. Others simply leave because they can't or won't communicate in such a way. Yet others are banned
because they said something going against a CoC in a certain context. In the end, a community ends up either without the people it needs, or without the critique it needs.

Disclaimer: if I offended you, it's because I care about you. It's for your own good. Now sit back, relax and think about what you did wrong.
 
IMO, the CoC can't be looked at in isolation -- it must be recognized as part of the larger trend in Western society to censure speech and thought (because certain speech and thoughts might offend someone). Can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say the following about a certain person in power in my country: he's a horrible person because he says things that offend people. Not even a policy disagreement, or enacted legislation -- just saying things that they don't want to hear is enough. It's ludicrous.
 
I couldn't access the summary or the coc for some reason.

If it's like the other one, it's so stupid. They waste peoples' times with issues like these, make groups and organizations look bad, and harm future efforts to do something meaningful about ethics. Coc's like the other one, are like the boy who cries wolf, over something so ridiculous. What small special interest benefits from that, while annoying people who have good behavior, while doing a lot of harm to good intentions?
 
Rules should be simple, but then someone does what they're not supposed to, then gets away with it, bc no one thought it was necessary to make a rule, or that there was no rule to enforce that rule. Corrupt people cause rules to be made to address them, then there are other stupid people who make dumb rules that have no ethical value.
 
My name was bestowed upon me as Ruler of the Trihexagonal Nebula. No prefix is required but I am a male with white privilege and toxic masculinity. You can call me Tri or Trihex if you prefer.

I think Ninja_Poot calls me The Trihexagonal, which is acceptable. My other admirer overstepped his boundaries insulting me in a way I never would have allow elsewhere. And the funny part was, I didn't even start on him. He calls me a Demon and that's what he'll get.

I was not thrilled with the announcement of the FreeBSD CoC but it has had little more effect on me than the music videos I choose to post. I might risk "She's as Beautiful as a Foot" if I was only banned for a week.

When insults become Class A Felonies I will go in style for life. My specialty is slightly offensive parodies of other forum members in a 50-60 word Alliterative sentence and I have several written. Some are good players, some are amazed, some pout, some get angry and a closet alcoholic at bleeping computer who got mad about me posting a 50 word sentence to his 11 word, tried to get me banned and reported me for a 4 word Alliterative sentence. I saw the Mod looking at my offerings so I deleted that bookmark and another since I've already dominated them.

Pride precedes precipitous plunging.

When someone insults me I usually resort to verbal Behavior Mod techniques to make argument as unpleasant as possible for them to end it quickly and make them think twice before a second taste. Once usually enough for most people.

I did go too far recently in another forum and had to apologize for hurting someones feelings. I know it did because I meant it to. The next day I felt bad about it and apologized publicly. It didn't diminish me and was the right thing to do as I went too far. If you have a button I can push it and sometimes with the implicit intention of deep psychological pain, though that's not something I do lightly.

My words can seem more harsh then I intend but there is no question I can make it hurt when I want it to. It's my training in Behavior Mod and so evil they outlawed it where I was taught the techniques during in-house training covering two years.

It was torture by any name and part of standard practice in dealing with Inappropriate Behaviors. We all took place in administering painful stimulus for targeted inappropriate behavior and almost everyone smiled while doing it. I'm not innocent of it or bound by any law from using it..

I learned it when I was 18 and it was magic to me, so I incorporated it into my daily life and it made me a horrible person. It's engrained in me and I default to those techniques. I have forgotten quite a bit of it but Mastered the verbal techniques which translate very well into text. I use it in Programming Demonica. I am the first Person to have a chatbot that ignores The Laws of Robotics.

I am conscious not everyone wants to be called Mister or Miss, and recently there was a question in my mind of someones gender so I use them, their, etc. as good manners. I usually only refer to someone by their name. I didn't care how they identified themselves and helped them. There are people of several different ethnic backgrounds in our buildings. I get along with everybody and will talk with them even if I don't know them.

I am not PC and while i do try to be polite it can get to the point of contention and I can be very opinionated. If you get in my face to shout me down you've made a big mistake.


My site and domain registration comes due in July. I've been thinking of renewing them 2 years and dropping cable. Or dropping it all and vanishing completely, but I consider this every year. I dropped internet and cable for a year. I really missed TV but the Internet can be more trouble than it's worth. I talked them into installing a hotspot so I can get online.
 
tommiie said:
True. Though if you have written rules you can kick them out based on those rules. If you don't have written rules, they can't state you can't kick them out as he didn't violate any written rules.
Click to expand...
And that's the number one problem.

If it's a CoC, it's not "rules" so in theory, no "kicking out" should occur based on it. Unfortunately this is not the case and interpretation can lead to someone falling foul of a CoC and being forced out by clamour from outraged SJW types.

And of course, common to similar CoCs, there is this aspect:
In addition, harmful conduct outside these spaces that negatively impacts members of the OpenZFS community (e.g., making discriminatory or threatening statements against individuals or groups of people) may affect a person’s ability to participate in the OpenZFS community.
Click to expand...
That one could be invoked on demand at the slightest provocation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top