The "discussion" is apparently over and we still have the Code of Conduct.
https://linuxcnc.org/CODE_OF_CONDUCT
It wasn't much of a discussion. Questions were asked but there were no
meaningful answers.
At the risk of offending any programmers in the LinuxCNC community by
appropriating programmer culture, here is my pseudo code for the
LinuxCNC Code of Conduct Fait Accompli:
01 IMPOSE CODE OF CONDUCT ON LINUXCNC COMMUNITY
02 IF COMPLAINTS > 0 THEN GOTO 02
03 END
All of the complaints by those who didn't feel a code of conduct was
needed have apparently now concluded and those who wanted a code of
conduct to regulate other people's behavior have won without ever
engaging on the issues... without ever justifying why their code of
conduct was needed, without explaining what event might have
precipitated the rules imposed on others, etc.
There was no need to explain who would decide what is "disinformation"
or "conspiracy theories", or who would decide what is "other conduct
which could reasonably be considered inappropriate", or who would decide
what is "inappropriate language" or "inappropriate images". There was
no need to explain why the Code of Conduct was required when there were
no hostile comments on this group until the Code of Conduct caused all
of the recent animosity, resulting in exactly what it purported to prevent.
One of the things I liked about LinuxCNC was that it was a community
effort. Certainly there are a core group of contributors (greatly
appreciated), but nobody was perceived as being in charge. There was a
spontaneous order arising from mutual cooperation. This open source
community functioned very well without a lot of rules, and certainly
without any rulers. I no longer feel that way. At best, rather than
everyone behaving with courtesy and respect toward others because it's
the right thing to do, it now feels like coerced behavior. I now feel
that this community is under the rule of unelected and as yet unnamed
rulers.
The process was so opaque that I still don't know if one person
unilaterally enacted the Code of Conduct, or was there some oligarchy
that made the decision after a secret discussion?
When someone violates one of the subjective rules in the new Code of
Conduct, will we then learn who the rulers are... or at least who the
enforcers are? Or will dissidents be quietly disappeared in the middle
of the night?
An open source community that has always operated on mutual consent is
now operating under dictatorial decree with all objections ignored and
unanswered. I think that's very sad.
I don't like the subjective rules in the Code of Conduct. They seem
politically motivated and the vague rules can be selectively enforced.
I also feel that the Code of Conduct will cause problems rather than
preventing problems. That concern seems warranted based on the hostile
arguments we've already suffered as a direct result of the Code of
Conduct. Mostly, I didn't like the way the Code of Conduct was
unilaterally decreed without discussion, and when a few people tried to
initiate a discussion, they were ignored by the person who posted the
Code of Conduct. I'm left with the feeling that there wasn't any
explanation for why the Code of Conduct was needed because there wasn't
an actual need to regulate the behavior of a group that has been self
regulated for decades. The Code of Conduct couldn't be justified, so
there was no effort to justify it. If there was an actual need, why
wasn't there a discussion that led to community standards that were
established by the community? That would have been a far less
contentious process than someone posting the new Code of Conduct for
everyone else to follow without prior discussion and without any
community consensus.
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
