Richard Stallman Announces GNU Kind Communication Guidelines (gnu.org) 448
AmiMoJo writes: Richard Stallman has announced the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines, an effort "to start guiding people towards kinder communication." The Guidelines differ from a Code of Conduct in that it's trying to be proactive about kindness around free software development over being rules with possible actions when breaking them.
These new GNU communication guidelines can be found at GNU.org along with Stallman's commentary. From the guidelines: A code of conduct states rules, with punishments for anyone that violates them. It is the heavy-handed way of teaching people to behave differently, and since it only comes into action when people do something against the rules, it doesn't try to teach people to do better than what the rules require. To be sure, the appointed maintainer(s) of a GNU package can, if necessary, tell a contributor to go away; but we do not want to need to have recourse to that. The idea of the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines is to start guiding people towards kinder communication at a point well before one would even think of saying, "You are breaking the rules." The way we do this, rather than ordering people to be kind or else, is try to help people learn to make their communication more kind. I hope that kind communication guidelines will provide a kinder and less strict way of leading a project's discussions to be calmer, more welcoming to all participants of good will, and more effective.
These new GNU communication guidelines can be found at GNU.org along with Stallman's commentary. From the guidelines: A code of conduct states rules, with punishments for anyone that violates them. It is the heavy-handed way of teaching people to behave differently, and since it only comes into action when people do something against the rules, it doesn't try to teach people to do better than what the rules require. To be sure, the appointed maintainer(s) of a GNU package can, if necessary, tell a contributor to go away; but we do not want to need to have recourse to that. The idea of the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines is to start guiding people towards kinder communication at a point well before one would even think of saying, "You are breaking the rules." The way we do this, rather than ordering people to be kind or else, is try to help people learn to make their communication more kind. I hope that kind communication guidelines will provide a kinder and less strict way of leading a project's discussions to be calmer, more welcoming to all participants of good will, and more effective.
Wait . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
Better than SJW/PC COCs (Score:5, Insightful)
Most codes of conduct now are being used in the same way political correctness is: to prohibit certain types of thinking, forcing everyone to think in the ways that are left, which conveniently benefit one group attempting to take over what's left of Western Civilization.
Having a positive goal like this, and basing it on civility and not political alignment, is intelligent. It nurtures rather than censors.
Re:Better than SJW/PC COCs (Score:5, Informative)
Only your first sentence was at all accurate. Political correctness started out as a way to silence and suppress people with the wrong politics -- whether they disagreed with the Communist Party or some other totalitarian regime -- and continues to have the same essential character today. Identifying it is not a suppressive action.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Political correctness is a silencing tactic.
This is true.
By designating something political correctness you are saying that it's trivial and unimportant, and therefore the person complaining is just whining.
Obviously, true - such things are indeed unimportant complaints from whiners.
The idea is to belittle people's concerns and requests to be treated better by implying that they are so inconsequential that the argument/request is ether absurd or not made in good faith.
Correct - they are not operating in good faith. Progressives seek to infest any establishment, gut it out, and wear it as a skin suit, while demanding respect. Attempts to control language are just one tool for that goal. CoCs are another.
Now it's expanded from just trying to silence them to being part of victimhood narrative where requests to recognize the affect that such things have on others is a form of bullying.
Correct: political corrctness has expanded from silencing tactic to victimhood narrative.
Re:Better than SJW/PC COCs (Score:5, Interesting)
Political correctness is a silencing tactic
No. That's how it is being used but it is far from what it means (or perhaps what it used to mean if we're truly that far gone). Likewise, guns are really handy tools, but a few asshats tend to fuck it up for everyone else by killing folks with them.
By designating something political correctness you are saying that it's trivial and unimportant
No, politically correct means a message that doesn't attempt to alienate either side of a debate, allowing an argument to be put forward that can be used to either further one side or the other, but all in how it is spun. However, some have taken that to be that the message has to be ultra-safe, which isn't true. Example of a politically correct statement, "The constant migrations of foreigners to the US is a clear demonstration that past and current foreign policy with Central and South America has failed." No one is being called an illegal, no one is indicating any particular President at fault, and so on. This statement can be spun in either direction depending on present company and at face value is equally palatable by whichever side you want to pick.
The idea is to belittle people's concerns and requests to be treated better by implying that they are so inconsequential that the argument/request is ether absurd or not made in good faith
Which actually gets into the "how's it's being used." Politics has become massively polarized at the moment and I'm pretty sure it'll ultimately swing back to something resembling sanity. However, you have those who'd argue for over-reaching PC because they see the other side's argument (as you say) trivial. You have those who'd argue that PS is a cancer and see the other side's argument as hand-waving. Either way, both sides are simply dismissing the other's because they don't want to actually reach some middle ground, instead they rather have the polarity. Polarized voters are easier to predict voters, polarized voters make stronger safe districts for political parties, and once upon time folks kind of realized that polarized politics meant less actual power in the voter's hands.
It really got going in the 80s when people...(rest of your comment)
No, this has always been a tactic in politics. It's centrist versus polarity, but PC is just the new name for it. And the polarity folks on either side use it as a tool for their narrative. In US politics I always like to apply the accelerator/brake metaphor for the polarity ends. The far left tend to be the accelerator "You're message isn't forceful enough, it needs to explicitly say what CAN and CANNOT be done or else it is just garbage." The far right tend to be the brake "Your group's mission will inevitably lead to everyone being lawsuited to death!" The far right need to allow progress to happen and get over their insecurities. The far left need to just chill the fuck out and stop telling people what they can't do.
Your comment isn't wrong, but it's assuming that PC is strictly defined as how it is being used and that's pretty depressing because it almost foregoes the fact that once upon a time it actually meant holding a centrist view and attempting to be affable to everyone. Maybe I'm naive in holding onto an archaic way of thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
"The constant migrations of foreigners to the US is a clear demonstration that past and current foreign policy with Central and South America has failed." No one is being called an illegal, no one is indicating any particular President at fault, and so on.
Unintentionally you have illustrated my point perfectly.
The person making the example statement is clearly making a general statement about migration, both legal and illegal, and determining legal status or assigning blame to particular presidents is irrelevant to that. Their point is that multiple government's policies have failed.
Thanks to the notion of political correctness you have been unable to parse that simple, clear statement without questioning why it doesn't include emotive language or assign bla
Re: (Score:2)
You assume that the speaker feels pressure to avoid doing those things
Sort of, I would assume that the candidate would wish to appeal to as many folks as possible to ensure victory within an election. There isn't any undue pressure other than to appeal to as many folks as possible. So yes there is pressure, but hardly what I would hoped is outside of normal pressure. Public discourse of politics is, well at least should be, a means to which we can openly discuss something. You hear someone say, "we need to start the conversation ..." That's kind of where I would assume i
Re:Better than SJW/PC COCs (Score:5, Insightful)
and I'm pretty sure it'll ultimately swing back to something resembling sanity
Why?
Multiple Congressmen have died in duels. There was literally an assault in the Senate chamber. [wikipedia.org]
The relative bipartisanship from roughly the 1940s to roughly the 1980s was an artifact of the Southern realignment. Before this, there were Republicans in all-but-name representing much of the South because Southerners hated the idea of voting for "the party of Lincoln". So while technically the various caucuses in Congress were party aligned, there also was a split between Southern Democrats/Western Republicans vs Northern Democrats and Republicans. So the leaders in Congress had to maintain their party split and the ideological split at the same time, resulting in far more bipartisanship than had ever happened before.
Then we get to the 1960s and civil rights legislation, and Southerners decided they hated black people more than they hated voting for "the party of Lincoln", so the Southern Democrats gradually converted to formally being members of the Republican party.
Once the Southern realignment was done, we went back to business as usual. And that isn't bipartisanship.
Either way, both sides are simply dismissing the other's because they don't want to actually reach some middle ground
Think about any controversial issue today. There is not a stable middle ground.
Subsidized shitty private insurance is not a middle ground between what the parties want in healthcare.
There is not a middle ground between "you are slaughtering children" and "the state can not be given absolute control of someone's uterus".
"We should only sort-of invade countries" is not a middle ground between conquest and non-intervention.
Just like there was no way to successfully compromise between slavery and freedom.
There is conflict because these issues can not be solved by compromise.
Re: (Score:2)
Political correctness is a silencing tactic
No. That's how it is being used but it is far from what it means (or perhaps what it used to mean if we're truly that far gone).
No true Scotsman much? I guess Communism really is great it's just never been implemented the right way too.
By designating something political correctness you are saying that it's trivial and unimportant
No, politically correct means a message that doesn't attempt to alienate either side of a debate, allowing an argument to be put forward that can be used to either further one side or the other, but all in how it is spun. However, some have taken that to be that the message has to be ultra-safe, which isn't true.
Example of a politically correct statement, "The constant migrations of foreigners to the US is a clear demonstration that past and current foreign policy with Central and South America has failed." No one is being called an illegal, no one is indicating any particular President at fault, and so on. This statement can be spun in either direction depending on present company and at face value is equally palatable by whichever side you want to pick.
Political correctness, as it stands today, is denial of reality. Reality is that people who come here illegally are by definition illegal aliens. That's as obvious as it gets.
The idea is to belittle people's concerns and requests to be treated better by implying that they are so inconsequential that the argument/request is ether absurd or not made in good faith
Which actually gets into the "how's it's being used." Politics has become massively polarized at the moment and I'm pretty sure it'll ultimately swing back to something resembling sanity. However, you have those who'd argue for over-reaching PC because they see the other side's argument (as you say) trivial. You have those who'd argue that PS is a cancer and see the other side's argument as hand-waving. Either way, both sides are simply dismissing the other's because they don't want to actually reach some middle ground, instead they rather have the polarity. Polarized voters are easier to predict voters, polarized voters make stronger safe districts for political parties, and once upon time folks kind of realized that polarized politics meant less actual power in the voter's hands.
While I don't disagree that polarized people are likely easier to control I'm still rooting for the *peaceful* breakup of the US. The common culture has drifted too far apart and basic values are no longer shared.
The far right need to allow progress to happen and get over their insecurities. The far left need to just chill the fuck out and stop telling people what they can't do.
I can't spea
Re:Better than SJW/PC COCs (Score:5, Insightful)
Incorrect.
Political Correctness is the idea that feelings are the most important thing, particularly over facts. Take the Healthy At Every Size (HAES) movement. This is probably the shining definition of PC. Of course, if you have anything critical to say about HAES, you are a fat shamer, you hate people, you're a bigot, etc.
You are right. PC is used to silence, but not in the way that you write about. It's dresses up being a bully as "being kind", because you're doing it in defense of perceived (rightly so or not) marginalized people. And you're allowed to do nearly anything in defense of those people, including being just as bad as the ones you're fighting against.
Re: (Score:3)
From the Kind Communications Guidelines:
"Please respond to what people actually said, not to exaggerations of their views."
For a start it's Health at Every Size, note the missing 'y'. Their view is that being healthy is somewhat independent of weight, and that it is near impossible for very overweight people to lose weight through dieting and traditional methods such as fat shaming. Rather they prefer to focus on being healthier at the higher weight.
Now I don't necessarily agree with them, I think it would
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
White people have nothing to be ashamed about
Yeah, that's not the issue.
The issue is that the descendents of slaves still face a lot of problems stemming from that history, and honouring the people who were part of the problem with their name on a building doesn't help. In fact, it makes things slightly worse...
It's like those statues of Confederate generals. They were mostly mass produced cheaply long after the war, when the civil rights movement was gaining traction in fact. They were designed to remind the people demanding equal rights that they we
Re:That just proves the stupidity of your side (Score:4, Insightful)
White people have nothing to be ashamed about
Yeah, that's not the issue.
But it becomes an issue because you can't even say it. For example there are various pride organizations for every ethnicity, sans white. Why can't we have a white scholarship? It's an obvious double standard and it undermines anyone who is calling for equality. The failure to perceive this obvious double standard is why I feel like most left leaning types lack logic. If you're interested in fairness of outcomes tie it to the well established metric of income, not the dubious metric of race. To tie affirmative action to race is to promote racism and says that Obama's two daughters need help while some poor white kids from the Appalachian mountains don't. Tying affirmative action to economics is actually trying to achieve something closer to fairness instead of trying to balance the racial scales regardless of fairness.
...They were designed to remind the people demanding equal rights that they were not equal...
Much like how colleges, and the left, demean the hated white male at every chance while promoting others.
Re:That just proves the stupidity of your side (Score:4, Insightful)
But it becomes an issue because you can't even say it. For example there are various pride organizations for every ethnicity, sans white. Why can't we have a white scholarship?
Here's the thing: there IS scholarship of German-Americans, and Irish-Americans, and Italian-Americans, and various other Americans of European descent, and that is a perfectly legitimate and worthwhile endeavor. If there's some particular European culture you come from, go for it, have some pride, put on your lederhosen or clogs or kilt and celebrate the grand traditions of your forebears. Nobody will give you a hard time about it.
If, however, you aren't trying to celebrate any of those cultures in particular, you are going to have a hard time, because of these issues: If you want to celebrate white pride, what, in precise terms, are you trying to celebrate? Who gets to be in your white pride march? Is the criteria the color of your skin? Is it that you come from Europe? Or specific parts of Europe? How about Mexicans, whose ancestors come from Europe as well? Many Jews are light-skinned and had ancestors in Europe - do they get to be a part of it? Who is it, exactly, that is included as "white"? And, more importantly, who is it that is excluded?
Re: (Score:3)
So say you had a Jewish Privilege Conference... What kind of issues would you discuss?
Re: (Score:3)
They were mostly mass produced cheaply long after the war, when the civil rights movement was gaining traction in fact. They were designed to remind the people demanding equal rights that they were not equal,
This is no better illustrated today than the news that popped up of Stacey Abrams (D candidate for Governor of Georgia) burning the Georgia state flag back in '92. In 1956 the Confederate battle flag emblem was added to the Georgia state flag (finally removed in 2003). Opponents of Abrams are basically pointing at her and saying "OMG she should never be Governor because of how she treated the state flag, wherein all likelihood the flag was figuratively desecrated back in '56 in order to intimidate a secti
Re:That just proves the stupidity of your side (Score:5, Insightful)
Slavery is over. It has been over for over 150 years. It was a terrible time in history, but guess what.. there are lots of them. Communism tortured, killed, and dehumanized millions of more people and is celebrated by the same people who support affirmative action and repatriations for slavery. How about, instead of blaming our current problems on long-dead generations past, maybe people of all races and backgrounds should be held accountable for their actions in the present?
There's a recruiting company you'd love (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
It has all sorts of jobs for people like yourself. I won't bother correcting your history essay.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like when Americans say they stop believing in some religion, and then keep the exact same mannerisms and mindsets, but merely apply them to an ideology".
FTFY
Re: (Score:3)
Agree with guideline #2. Bless RMS. Hopes he survi (Score:4, Informative)
2. I disagree with making "diversity" a goal. If the developers in a
specific free software project do not include demographic D, I don't
think that the lack of them as a problem that requires action; there
is no need to scramble desperately to recruit some Ds. Rather, the
problem is that if we make demographic D feel unwelcome, we lose out
on possible contributors. And very likely also others that are not in
demographic D.
Re:Agree with guideline #2. Bless RMS. Hopes he su (Score:5, Insightful)
RMS manages to explain the goals of people concerned about things like diversity really well. His footnote about genderless pronouns is really good too, taking it as written that a person's gender identity is their identity but also showing how what matters is respecting that, not the exact words or conforming to some arbitrary standard.
I'm always impressed by his ability to think and write clearly, getting to the heart of the matter in a concise way.
Re:Agree with guideline #2. Bless RMS. Hopes he su (Score:4, Interesting)
There is just no reason for anyone contributing to an online collaboration needs to make their gender public. The normal English pronouns for a person whose gender is unimportant or unknown work fine: "he, him, his".
Fun fact, English used to have a distinct word for male adult: "were". It survives only in werewolf and wereguild. The gender-indeterminate "man" has replaced "were", because men are unimportant. We have words to highlight when a person is important or valuable, like "king" or "woman", but there was just no need for a word for "male adult" distinct from "adult".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
FTFY
That is incorrect. "Their" is plural of his/her/its. We know his sex. Their is NOTHING wrong with using the correct pronoun that corresponds with his known nature - It is the suppression of doing so that is becoming the insane norm.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
2. I disagree with making "diversity" a goal. If the developers in a
specific free software project do not include demographic D, I don't
think that the lack of them as a problem that requires action; there
is no need to scramble desperately to recruit some Ds. Rather, the
problem is that if we make demographic D feel unwelcome, we lose out
on possible contributors. And very likely also others that are not in
demographic D.
Except you automatically lose out just by having a limited perspective... we all have that, it's just part of life. eg Text and UI controls requiring young levels of eyesight and motor control because nobody making the UI is old or disabled, Camera film being not very good at capturing black skin because it was calibrated by white people for white people, etc
Diversity is a net gain because it gives us perspectives that we can't hold ourselves, and we'll be able to build for everyone not just people who are
Re:Agree with guideline #2. Bless RMS. Hopes he su (Score:4, Informative)
eg Text and UI controls requiring young levels of eyesight and motor control because nobody making the UI is old or disabled
This is not an issue of lack of diversity of your developers, but lack of feedback from a representative group of your users.
Camera film being not very good at capturing black skin because it was calibrated by white people for white people, etc
Camera film today being bad at capturing black skin because calibrated "by white people for white people" in general? That smells like bullshit.
Do you have recently taken pictures in side-by-fashion on a modern film properly exposed and developed without touch-up work as proof of this?
Cameras and camera film are designed for capturing arbitrary images --- MANY MANY, perhaps most being pictures of inanimate objects/scenes from nature, so the ability for film to accurately take a very high depth of color across the spectrum is necessary...
Unless you have some really really oddball special film... cameras are are meant to capture a scene with high detail containing any color; not just people, let-alone people with a particular skin tone.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The camera example is from the past and not really valid any more, but well documented, and the reasons are still valid.
In an ideal world having good feedback from users would fix this, but we never have that in real life. How many times have we heard that innovation is made by people scratching their own itch? Developers have a massive influence on the product because of all the tiny decisions that they make to make their own lives better, improvements that don't go through the bureaucracy of making a chan
Re: (Score:2)
This is not an issue of lack of diversity of your developers, but lack of feedback from a representative group of your users.
For an open source project if someone comes to you with a bug that can only be reproduced by being black, and you aren't black... More over it really helps to think about this stuff earlier in the development of features, rather than someone come along when it's all done and point out that your UI is difficult for colourblind people or the fact that you can't change the font size is a major issue for them.
Honestly the best thing to happen to computers in the last decade has been the ability to properly scal
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. Good photographers use different film for different situations. Fuji Velvia is beloved by landscape photographers, but it makes people in portraits look weird. Portrait photographers will often use film that is balanced to warm the colours up a bit because it tends to make people (of all colours) look better.
If I remember correctly, the supposedly racist film is actually early black and white film that would preserve detail in white faces but make people with very dark skin just look black. That
Re: (Score:3)
To quote a google email on the Damore memo "we don't want diversity of ideas".
Diversity of ideas is great. That's the last thing anyone pushing for "diversity" actually wants - they want lockstep orthodoxy of belief.
Re: (Score:2)
To quote a google email on the Damore memo "we don't want diversity of ideas".
I searched and this doesn't seem to be a quote. Do you have a link perhaps?
The nearest I could find was:
Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions.
http://fortune.com/2017/08/07/... [fortune.com]
Re: (Score:2)
In the old days, people weren't afraid to fork a project in order to do their own damn thing.
That was true diversity: Prove your worth in the market place of ideas.
Until the marketplace of ideas stomps all over your little project for not having the scale or funding to survive. What's wrong with trying to make your own (very big successful) project appeal to a wider variety of people? I despair at the selfishness on this site.
Re: (Score:2)
He is only asking. He can have his diversity goals, and you can have your colorblind focus on results. When it's only asking, you can agree to disagree. Everyone can get along.
When someone is only asking, it can be a discussion instead of a fight.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's happening too.
However, there have been numerous studies showing that if you take the *exact* same resume, changing only the name to sound white, black, or female, the one that sounds like a white man is substantially more likely to lead to an interview. And you can't really blame that on anything but bias in the hiring institution, a factor that's probably amplified by an existing lack of diversity.
Re: (Score:2)
There have been a bunch of studies. Some one way, some another.
In tech, 'women's names' get more interviews. Because the recruiters are all under pressure to find female techs/engineers/programmers.
'Low class' black names do get fewer interviews than 'high class' white names, nobody has ever done a study comparing redneck 'white names' (e.g. BillyJoeJimBob) against made up spelling 'black names' (e.g LaTrina).
Re4lated article - Weaponized Empathy (Score:5, Interesting)
It's interesting that a bunch of ideas seem to be floating around the same time now about improving communities - that article yesterday on the monastic code of conduct for SQLLite, this ideal from GNU, and also an article I read recently on Weaponized Empathy [codinghorror.com] - the kinds of behaviors you want to lock out of communities as soon as you see them to keep them healthy.
It seems like between the three ideas you could build up pretty solid community and moderation guidelines that would really make for a lasting peace and a great place to hang out on the internet.
Re:Re4lated article - Weaponized Empathy (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a great document. Slashdot could benefit from a lot of these ideas:
"Please assume other participants are posting in good faith, even if you disagree with what they say."
"Please do not criticize people for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done; stick to what they actually say and actually do."
"Go out of your way to show that you are criticizing a statement, not a person."
"Please recognize that criticism of your statements is not a personal attack on you."
"Please avoid statements about the presumed typical desires, capabilities or actions of some demographic group."
"Please respond to what people actually said, not to exaggerations of their views."
Re: (Score:2)
http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-... [dilbert.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Put your money where your mouth is: employ these guideilnes on the next Trump-bashing piece.
Ah, I'm just kidding - I know that will never happen. "Please avoid statements about the presumed typical desires, capabilities or actions of some demographic group" for one is a non-starter. Where would we be without sneering at the unwashed masses?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some people have crappy parents. Others figure that when they turn 18 they can forget all those stupid rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only if the SJWs call off their social justice war. Or if the 80% of the rest of us who oppose political correctness [theatlantic.com] decide to stick up for ourselves and stop being pushed around by toxic bullies.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only if the SJWs call off their social justice war. Or if the 80% of the rest of us who oppose political correctness [theatlantic.com] decide to stick up for ourselves and stop being pushed around by toxic bullies.
Or you could start acting as the bigger person instead of reverting to threats and childish three-letter-acronyms to belittle people who have opinions you don't like.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Or you could start acting as the bigger person instead of reverting to threats and childish three-letter-acronyms to belittle people who have opinions you don't like.
Yeah, adults never use 3 letter acronyms. This is an awesome point. Everyone and everything that was ever referred to by an acronym is a victim. Like the people of the U.K., the USA, and the EU.
On behalf of everyone ever, please accept my apologies for every time anyone in the world ever used an acronym for anything.
Also sorry for the "threats" you seem to be imagining. So incredibly sorry.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You know as well as I do that "SJW" is a term made up specifically to group people you don't like and dismiss them en masse. But sure, deliberately pretend I mean the number of letters if it makes you feel better.
Re: (Score:2)
It's descriptive of motive and tactics.
Re: (Score:2)
From the Code of Kindness:
"Please assume other participants are posting in good faith, even if you disagree with what they say."
Presumably you don't think that the GP really meant that the problem was three letter acronyms, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Presumably you don't think that the GP really meant that the problem was three letter acronyms, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Complaining about words is a tactic to censor unfavorable messages. If they call off the war, they can be social justice supporters.
Is it a war? If not, why be so defensive?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
>How do you...
Easy. First recognize that noisy assholes are pretty much never actually even remotely representative of the groups they claim to represent. And that there will *always* be noisy assholes attacking *anything* with any public profile, for the simple reason that noisy assholes generally don't really care about the goal, they're in it for the fight itself. You can usually identify them by the fact that they throw around perjoratives and attack people expressing a different opinion, rather t
That's why I posted the link (Score:2)
Only if the SJWs call off their social justice war.
The typical SJW behavior is the kind of thing that doesn't mesh well with a set if kindness guidelines, because it relies a lot of exaggeration and othering.
That's why I think it's such a great pairing with the article I linked to, which is the other side of the equation - how to decide who to remove if they cannot or will not abide by notions of kindness? It lays out what I think is an excellent structure to be able to dismiss the very worst sort of peopl
There is no war (Score:2)
The SJWs are doing nothing against you. They never have. Stop assuming that a lack of victims on a side that never existed is tantamount to you being attacked.
Re: (Score:2)
I like how you claimed to agree with the concept in the post, and then immediately disregarded the concept in the post.
systemic laws of organisations (Score:2)
this has been studied for many decades, not related to software libre at all. the book i recommend is named "invisible dynamics": https://www.amazon.co.uk/Invis... [amazon.co.uk]
it outlines six systemic laws - and they are laws (not "guidelnes") - which, when you examine them closely, you will find that any software libre project (or any business) that violates one of those laws is a project that *will* be in trouble, in some form. as the book has to be paid for, i extracted the systemic laws and outlined them here: htt [libre-riscv.org]
Thanks for asking (Score:4)
Asking people to be kind is the right answer.
Zealots and totalitarians won't be happy though.
Re: (Score:2)
He suggests respecting people's gender identity and chosen name, giving people respect by default, not using language that might discourage participation by certain groups etc. All the standard problems people here have with a Code of Conduct...
Which makes me wonder, why the mostly positive response? Is it the lack of any kind of enforcement, in which case what do you do about some toxic asshat causing trouble? Or is it just that people have respect for RMS and can't find some old tweets or blog posts sugge
Re: (Score:3)
Which makes me wonder, why the mostly positive response?
He suggests. He is asking.
Do you really not understand the difference between asking versus demanding and threatening?
Or is it just that people have respect for RMS and can't find some old tweets or blog posts suggesting he is a social justice warrior?
A warrior who isn't waging a war is just a person.
Re: (Score:2)
He suggests. He is asking.
Okay, so the question then is what if someone decides to ignore his polite suggestion and causes problems. I don't think he means to imply that there should be no way of dealing with such a person.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so the question then is what if someone decides to ignore his polite suggestion and causes problems. I don't think he means to imply that there should be no way of dealing with such a person.
Stop making up stories about that. Why would a non-totalitarian want to make up stories where he could justify using power against people?
A warrior who is building weapons and cataloguing the weakness of those around him is a threat.
Re: (Score:2)
Great. So, will you drop your trousers please so that we can all confirm that your gender really is what you say it is?
No? Then why are you asking others to do the same? They say they're X, call them X. Especially online, where you're unlikely to see anyone's trousers in the first place, on or off. Or should every woman with a beard, and every man with breasts, be required to drop their trousers when talking to you before you'll use the proper pronoun?
Re: Thanks for asking (Score:2)
USENET tried that with the Netiquette FAQ.
You still had trolls, abusers and the "pity me, I'm not allowed to kill anyone" brigade.
Fewer of them, but you still had them.
Such people won, which is why there are so many opposed to Netiquette or decency to others.
Interesting comment from Stallman (Score:3)
2. I disagree with making "diversity" a goal. If the developers in a specific free software project do not include demographic D, I don't think that the lack of them as a problem that requires action; there is no need to scramble desperately to recruit some Ds. Rather, the problem is that if we make demographic D feel unwelcome, we lose out on possible contributors. And very likely also others that are not in demographic D.
There is a kind of diversity that would benefit many free software projects: diversity of users in regard to skill levels and kinds of usage. However, that is not what people usually mean by "diversity".
Meaningless without enforcement (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem in rhe geek community these days is that it has been infested with people who took advantage of our refusal to reject anyone, abusing the system to bully and bullshit whoever they wanted without fear of consequences. And like many victims of abuse, we meekly complied to keep the peace when we should have kicked them out.
That needs to change. The incels and manchildren have had decades to prove that they won't change without enforcement, so it's time to bring in enforcement. There will be some in
From the heart (Score:2)
I'll bet this comes from the heart
Stallman is routinely and extensively criticized for saying things he hasn't said.
Compare with "How to ask questions the smart way" (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems that parents are no longer teaching their children how to behave in public.
Obviously this didn't start last week, because a lot of the offenders have been out of the house for a long time.
Lately it seems that it's become so prevalent that we need some (more) remedial education.
ESR's essay is instructive to people who want to participate in geek culture but don't yet know the social norms therein. It seems lately that the prerequisites for participating in any culture at all--starting with recognizing that dignity [wikipedia.org] in others and in ones self are missing.
The grumpy old man in me suspects that society is crumbling and this is a doomed attempt to patch it.
The hopeful old man in me knows we have been assholes to each other for a long time and enough of us are fed up that all of are starting to hear about it.
This kind of self-discipline by communities is a messy process, but it really does seem like it's worth a try.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems that parents are no longer teaching their children how to behave in public.
You simply have no means to correct child's behavior in public if child is not cooperative. Leftist made "discipline" a dirty word and managed to conflate it with child abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Over 11,000 words and more than 65k characters - my limited 16 bit brain overflowed.
The TL;DR version is search first, then pick the right venue, then ask nicely.
OMG! It's filled with religious zealotry! (Score:3, Informative)
From the Guidelines:
By contrast, to suggest that others use nonfree software opposes the basic principles of GNU, so it is not allowed in GNU Project discussions.
This is the kind of religious/political zealotry that turns people off CoCs!
(Just kidding BTW. I personally avoid nonfree software to an extreme.)
Re: (Score:2)
From the Guidelines:
By contrast, to suggest that others use nonfree software opposes the basic principles of GNU, so it is not allowed in GNU Project discussions.
This is the kind of religious/political zealotry that turns people off CoCs!
(Just kidding BTW. I personally avoid nonfree software to an extreme.)
You say "just kidding", but there are some problem domains where there are no FOSS solutions nor will there ever be any FOSS solutions. Absolute statements like this from RMS fly in the face of this position which means either I am not welcome in GNU projects, or I have to pick and choose which parts of his CoC I accept and which I reject - which in both cases defeats the point of the COC in the first place.
Question (Score:2)
I've worked with people like that.
What do we do about someone who simply doesn't like someone so decides that everything they they write is a thinly veiled insult?
I've worked with people like that.
What do we do in the case of the inevitable use of the CoC as a bludgeon?
To think that this will not happen is naivety in the extreme.
So here we have it. The Prime Directive is not the project any more. T
So how do I tell a fuckup he/she is a fuckup now? (Score:2)
Because that is something these people have to be told.
I really love teaching in contrast. There I can just fail the failures. No, no backlash, as here academic education does not serve to make a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod up pls!
There is no difference, that's the point (Score:5, Insightful)
What makes Rich-shart Stallman any more of a moral authority than the twitter team at Steakums (tm) or the good folk at Firestorne Tyres (tm)?
He is not any more or less of an expert than those people - and that's the whole point.
What he is is human, and fundamentally, deep down, all humans know how to be kind.
Ideas like these (not rules) help guide someone to remembering what it means to be kind, that other people are generally trying to be kind also and to remember that as well.
There will always be some outliers but the point is to at least try, if you don't take a first step you'll never get anywhere.
Re:There is no difference, that's the point (Score:5, Funny)
No matter how kind you think you are, German children are kinder.
Re:There is no difference, that's the point (Score:5, Insightful)
This is excellent news. A proactive, gentle reminder to all to be kinder is a positive step.
And, the reaction to this, by those some pejoratively call 'SJWs' will be telling: if what they truly want is peaceful and respectful interactions in and around software projects, they should be optimistic at this development.
If, on the other hand, their *real* goal is surreptitious power grabs via identity-politics-based using reverse discrimination and 'victimhood' to tear down whatever 'privilege' structure bothers them, then this will make them go absolutely *nuts*.
In the end, if the code is bad, it won't work, so who wrote it is ultimately irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
by those some pejoratively call 'SJWs'
On the contrary: the term SJW is not a pejorative, but the opposite; it actually casts the person in a positive light... as "Warriors" or "Heros" of Social Justice. These people CHOSE that term for themselves, and then they twist the concept of Justice to mean various things including "eliminating perceived statistical inequalities in society by any means" ----- It would be nice if we had a replacement term for SJWs which was less romanticized and expres
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is people listen to him.
He is no better or worse then someone else but he has a soapbox and people to heat them.
Re: IT's all so tiresome (Score:2)
Re:IT's all so tiresome (Score:5, Informative)
I will communicate with people how I feel they deserve to be communicated with.
Indeed, please do. And those communities will be just as free to shun you for being an arsehole.
Re: (Score:2)
We need a name for this kind of thing. Maybe "toxic meritocracy"? Everyone starts out as pond scum and has to earn your respect on your terms, or you treat them with at best contempt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I will communicate with people how I feel they deserve to be communicated with.
Me too, however I don't intentionally try to insult people even if they are, like you, idiots drooling on their keyboards. Unless they deserve it of course.
Re: IT's all so tiresome (Score:2)
How about:
a) He doesn't assert himself as such
b) Even if he did, he is a God
Re: (Score:2)
Re:IT's all so tiresome (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe this is a 'Only Nixon could go to China' moment for civil behavior.
I mean, if freaking Stallman can admit that it is time to be civil, then maybe everybody can make the same assessment
There's nothing wrong with being civil, and even Linus in his most inflammatory periods would agree (even if he's violating them). The CC and CoC-enforcement community wants far more than a minimal definition of "civil", and that's the rub.
RMS's statement seems quite reasonable, because it basically boils down to:
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
That's a much better foundation for a conduct agreement than the course listing at your local humanities department.
Re: (Score:2)
the next ToeJam joker is going to the gulag.
Crap.
Re: (Score:2)
I for one do not welcome our mentally ill gender neutral overlords. You can identify as mayonnaise all you want, but i won't refer to you that way.
This would seem to be covered by the Code of Kindness:
"Please do not criticize people for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done; stick to what they actually say and actually do."
"Please respond to what people actually said, not to exaggerations of their views."
Could probably benefit from something about not diagnosing people with mental illnesses too. Anyway, in this case the issue is clearly that no-one is trying to self identify as mayonnaise, and you are exaggerating their requests to make yo
Re: (Score:2)
If someone demands to be referred to as "Admiral Krang of the Klingon Empire", it's not a stretch to assume they have mental issues. If their code comments are only in Klingon, or they only respond to questions in Klingon, they may not be welcome. If someone clarifies that they are a "she" or a "he", sure, whatever, it's irrelevant to code. But if someone starts making up pronouns and insisting on them, or changes their pronouns from day to day, or otherwise becomes a pain in the ass to have a simple co
Re: (Score:2)
I for one do not welcome our mentally ill gender neutral overlords.
You can personally believe they are mentally ill all you like, but you don't get to say -- still "humor them" and respect
whatever preference a person says their gender Id is; if it comes up in a project-related discussion.
If a person makes an issue out of other people's gender identity or refuses to comply with their gender
preferences, then yeah, that person's toxic and should be given at least a timeout or suspension, And yeah....
Re: (Score:3)
My preferred pronoun in 'Huey', you know what I identify as but refuse to call me a 'super cobra'. Bigot! The government owes me two turbines.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume that people who look between their legs and deny or want to change what they see are mentally ill
Which is purely your opinion. A lot of other people believe very differently - especially with the distinction between sex and gender.
I also assume that people who get body mods to look like a vampire are mentally ill.
Again .. another personal opinion on your part. Do you also count other body mods such as piercings and tattoos in the same group of people you believe are mentally ill? If not, what qualifies as a body mod that you ascribe to a mental illness?
Re: (Score:2)
So what should we assume about you when we demonstrate that sexuality and gender is a lot more complex than the structures that develop between someone's legs?
For example, there's people who are XY who are born with a vagina. Do you want to count their genes as the "right" answer or their crotch? What's the answer for people born with both?
This is biology. Nothing is binary. Everything is gradients, and many times things "don't work like they're supposed to".
I've never known Stallman to be wrong (Score:2)
If he says a new and improved version is good, then the concept must be good.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to. Stop whining. ;-)
"Treat other members of the community with basic respect and decency" isn't exactly some sort of new-age touchy-feely bullshit - it's pretty much been the foundation of every community in history - even hate-mongering groups like the KKK whose entire reason for existing it to chase off particular non-members with fear and violence. Klansmen are still decent to each other.
It's pretty much been the foundation of Free software communities as well - the only problem is that they'
Re: (Score:3)
You gotta be cruel to be kind.
If someone can't code, they are _wasting_their_life_ trying to contribute the Kernel. The sooner they get on with getting a job digging ditches the better for them.
Re: (Score:2)
The Time Cube is strong with this one. AC may have discovered "four-cornered empathy". However, he left out that those who disagree have been "educated stupid" (which, in this case, I'd agree with). Keep pluggin away, AC, we all miss Time Cube.
Re: (Score:2)
*sigh*....
Stallman's problem is that he's trying to jam licensing into things that don't quite fit.
I saw some of this in 2000, when I ran across the conflict between going 100% open-source on teaching Linux, and the prospect of students copying/passing-around test answers under the banner of 'well, it's open source, isn't it?' Thus was born the incredibly clumsy Open Documentation License (okay, okay - I'm sorry already!)
Licensing works for simple self-contained items - code for instance. For documents, Cop
Re: (Score:3)
I appreciate that he's trying to solve a problem here, but using legal licensing mechanisms to get people to be nice to each other?
I believe your comment itself can be considered a violation of his code, see:
Please respond to what people actually said, not to exaggerations of their views. RMS is not trying to use "legal licensing mechanisms" to get people to be nice to each other
GNU Project guidelines and Policies the FSF adopts regarding communications between contributors on their mailing lists, etc a