* Andreas Enge <andr...@enge.fr> [2019-11-06 10:34]: > Hello, > > starting with the subject of your message, it conflates two completely > unrelated concepts: a social contract, which is a mission statement and > statement of the general principles of an organisation, as well with respect > to the inner workings as well as an engagement to the outer world; and a code > of conduct, that gives rules about expected behaviour in a given context > (conference attendance, mailing list postings, and so on), as well as a > procedure that can be followed if the rules are broken. > > If you start by equating two unrelated concepts, nothing useful can come > out of a discussion.
They may be in practice often intertwined, they are not practically completely unrelated concepts. Point of that message which you quoted is to encourage contributions from anybody. As you are signer of the public shaming of GNU project and RMS, obviously people are discouraged of contributing. I have given you few clear evidences. Can you see that it is discouraging and not welcoming contributions? Do you understand that mentioning various GNU projects causes contributors in those GNU projects not contribute if they find fallacies in your public shamings statement? As a signer of public shaming, I cannot know what is your motivation as related to encouraging contributions. It appears you have same motivation. Am I right? Please answer me? Real question is what can be done to welcome new contributions to GNU project? Could we try creating practical applicable methods to welcome contributions to GNU project? We need practical applicable method or manner on how to welcome and invite more contributions to GNU project. There is one way and other way to agree on same purpose. As unless you answer my above questions negatively, we are on the same purpose which is to welcome more contributions, there is just the method or manner that is not practical, rather destructive way to do it, and there is other method or manner that is practical and applicable. Calling out to negativities whatever they may be, just or unjust, founded or not founded, argumented or not argumented, is negative way of trying to achieve more contributions. It attracts Streisand effect[1]. It is one of the ways of doing things. To be more specific, your public shamings page on Guix project is one type of manner of trying to attract more contributors. You just think that public shamings is the way to go. And I don't. But we are on same purpose to attract more contributors. And what is result of the public shaming campaign? Did you apply the method as some engineer who knows the work of public relations and did you actually achieve more contributors and contributions to GNU project? Or did you achieve contrary effect, to lose fans of Guix system, and to lose contributors to Guix? As this was evident from one of my previous references to loss of contributions and Guix fan' support. Other way is to encourage practically and applicably more contributors. For example, if you maybe think that women is less or if you are sharing opinion that women is by any manner harassed or discriminated, then you could make a campaign on Guix pages to welcome more women. I hope that you understand this. In summary one can point out to negativity, while not being effective and practical, resulting with zero new contributions to Guix project or any others based on such. Count if you got new women contributions because of that public shamings you people issued. Count it, and see, as that is the result. You should also count comments from people who felt harassed by that statement and publicly stated to remove their contributions from Guix. Observe your method of achieving the same purpose, analyse it critically[2]. And then one can devise practical ways that would efficiently bring new women into Guix. Then you could actually count new contributions by women to Guix, and you could say you are doing something positive. And people would give more support to Guix and other GNU projects, and there would be more contributions. Let me give you examples of positive, practical and efficient methods of achieving the same purpose we talk about (encouraging contributions): How Do You Start a Career in Tech? –Lightning Talk Night– https://www.meetup.com/Women-Who-Code-Tokyo/events/253653211/ The article starts with: "Dear women, WE NEED YOU! Are you a woman considering a career in technology? You’re not alone. The tech industry needs you more than ever, and we’re here to help you get there. Do you need to be a genius? Do you have to quit your job to study programming? Is it ever too late? No, no, and no! Come and hear women like you talk about the tech world, how they got into it, and why you should join them." Do you see the difference between the purpose to encourage more contributions by manner of public shamings and achieving number of discouraged contributors -- between the other method of attracting more women by creating special pages, incentives, acknowledgements and making it practical so that actual contributions by women could be counted and become more visible? That is my proposal to Guix. Copy to Ludovic. Make a project to include more women in Guix project. Do it positively, not negatively. Get a number of contributions by women, and not a number of discouraged developers. Instead of inciting public shamings as campaigns, please make a project named something like "Women Welcome To Code" Campaign. I cannot see any blog article on Guix mentioning women or welcoming women. It would be good to create a project to welcome women, even to give some incentives for participations. Remote internship is possibility to attract women around the world that are looking for such opportunities, Guix can then issue them certificates of internship that furthers their carrier. GNU Guix project needs more articles welcoming attitude and articles and efficient, practical and applicable methods to attract more women. Jean Footnotes: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
