Hi, For me, communities should be secure spaces in general for the people, not for the arguments, which means that constructive criticism should be addressed to the arguments in a community without personal attacks on the people there, as a general rule. I'm pretty secure that Code of Conducts intent to provide secure spaces beyond just digital spaces and go also into physical and face to face ones. When communities are small and from people who know each other, some explicit Code of Conduct maybe is not so needed, but at some point it would be. And in that context a wide discussion about which one could be selected and how is an important one. For example, in Latin America I have not seen a huge movement about new pronouns and I don't know any of such for Spanish.
The raised concerns about a Code that states punishment without restoration or defense is an important one, but also are the ones about technical communities where improper behavior is allowed because is not a "technical issue". We may lock for examples in different communities to see which one fits better our own. This is an important conversation to have, once it has been raised. Cheers, Offray On 16/09/19 5:09 p. m., Richard O'Keefe wrote: > There was a point raised in the Ruby discussion (where my thoughts > about Matz changed from "inventor of a language that filled a > much-needed gap" to "really thoughtful so maybe I was wrong about > Ruby") which I think is sufficient reason for a major revision to the > Coraline Code. (For the record, I'm centre-left.) > > There is a process for punishing, but no process for restoration. > > Any morally acceptable code should be explicit that in the absence of > a legal conviction, no person may be banned or locked out for more > than some reasonable period, such as 2 years. If someone re-offends > after such a period, impose another temporary ban or lockout. > > Given the way the concept of "harassment" has been misused, it no > longer has any place in a code of conduct. Harassment these days is > whatever the percipient judges it to be. There was a Pogo cartoon in > which Pogo said "good morning" to a couple of other characters. > Afterwards, one of them said to the other "Pogo is so mealy-mouthed > that 'good morning' from him could be someone else's 'drop dead'." > Then that was satire. Today it's reality. One of my daughter's > friends was reported as harassing another woman. What did she do? > Sat quietly in the car, looking straight ahead, neither saying > anything nor moving. I know this because I was in the driver's seat > at the time. The same woman accused my wife of harassing her. How? > By sitting quietly in another room facing away from her. My wife's > offence was that if this woman looked at her through an internal > window, she could see her. I was sitting in the same room as the > complainer at the time. If just sitting quietly minding your own > business can be construed as harassment, NOBODY is safe. > > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 06:59, Ramon Leon <ramon.l...@allresnet.com > <mailto:ramon.l...@allresnet.com>> wrote: > > On 2019-09-11 1:07 p.m., Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > > Based on the reaction earlier in the thread, I was expecting > something > > highly opinionated and polarizing, but it seems to boil down to: be > > professional and don't make it personal. While there are some > categories of > > people mentioned, it doesn't seem to make a value judgement > about them, but > > merely say that no one (including from those categories) will be > harassed > > inside the Pharo community. Seems pretty reasonable, unless I'm > missing > > something... > > You're missing what some progressives consider harassment these > days. These codes of conduct are being used around the net to > force progressive political ideology into technical communities, > the vague language is used to claim offense at any number of > things like misgendering, or refusing to use any number of made up > pronouns. Using inclusive language means using progressive > language like ze/zir, per/pers, ey/em, xe/xem if someone demands > it. This is language policing and a forcing of political ideology > into what should not be political. People are being kicked out of > communities for violating codes of conduct of the community > outside of the community, i.e. you said something on twitter or > facebook and now you're banned from an open source project for it > even though it had nothing to do with the project. > > The person who created this particular code of conduct is a well > known trans activist who first gets communities to accept the code > of conduct, and then stalks people around web to find anything > anywhere that might violate the vague code of conduct and then > tries to cancel them in every community they're a part of. If > you're not wary of this code of conduct, you're not paying > attention to how it's being used out there. > > Here's a few quotes from the author of this code of conduct. > > "The Ruby community has no moral compass. Just aphorisms and > self-congtatulatory, masturbatory bullshit." << after trying and > failing to kick the creator of Ruby out of the Ruby community. > > "If you're not fighting alongside us, or lending support, you're > STANDING IN OUR WAY. And I vow that I will walk right the fuck > over you.". > > "Fact: the solution to the problems in tech is not more tech. > Especially not more tech written by privileged, heads-in-the-sand > white dudes." > > "So many cis het white tech dudes with large platforms on here, > that not only don't engage in dialog on issues of social justice > but don't even elevate the voices of those of us who do, ignoring > POLITICS is a PRIVILEGE and I FUCKING SEE YOU." > > Here's a little history of this code of conduct and some other > popular communities. > > https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/974038-why-the-linux-coc-is-bad/ > > It's sad to see that Pharo has jumped onto this PC bandwagon, it > does not bode well for the community. > > -- > Ramón León > >
