I did some thinking, and discussion with others. I admit, I have not been respectful of those who have remained committed (where I haven't) to the principles of the Scalaz project since 2014.
I am going to change that. On 08/03/17 16:44, Tony Morris wrote: > This document is maintained at > https://github.com/scalaz/faq/blob/master/conduct.md > > # Scalaz conduct FAQ > > *Intended to be read in order, top to bottom* > > ---- > > * **Does Scalaz have a code of conduct?** > > Yes. It was decided by several people during discussions in 2005/2006. > It was > never called that, but it is in effect, exactly that. > > * **Where is the code of conduct written?** > > It's not. It likely never will be. > > * **But then it's not real?** > > Show me a more real code of conduct. > > * **The code of conduct that was imposed in October 2014 is more real, > because > it was written, right?** > > This document was the outcome of a meeting held at the StrangeLoop 2014 > conference. I know who was at that meeting. I know exactly what was > said. I > will not divulge the evidence for this matter of fact, due to risks to > safety > of individuals who are not me [if it were just me, I would not care > since I am > not intimidated by this tactic]. The objective of the meeting was, "how to > remove Tony Morris from the Scalaz project." The code of conduct that you > speak of was the result of that meeting. It was a hoax that was > immediately > recognised as such by many people. The specific details of this matter > of fact > came to be known soon after. > > This politicking is a recurring agenda that had played out since 2006. It > wasn't a new thing, just a new tactic. StrangeLoop also being one of > the first > conferences to have a written code of conduct. Can't get any more full > of shit > than that. > > * **But it was the benevolent dictator, the steward, of the Scalaz > project, so > it must be real, right?** > > The Scalaz project does not have a benevolent dictator, or a dictator, > or a > steward, or any such nonsense, at all. Not ever, nor ever will. That one > individual appoints themselves as such, is just a boring consequence of > delusions of grandeur. One day you might meet someone claiming to be > Jesus. > Just nod and smile. > > A fool once said a foolish thing on the internet. Treat it like you > normally > do. > > * **But all his buddies believed it, so surely it has credibility!?** > > A few people having private meetings, does not lend itself to credibility. > Small groups of people believe all sorts of bizarre things, and have > done for > centuries. That has nothing at all to do with the Scalaz project, > despite what > you might be told in misrepresentations. > > * **OK, so what are some guiding principles of the Scalaz code of conduct?** > > One is inclusivity. All people are welcome to contribute to the Scalaz > project, and others related. > > * **Everyone?** > > Yes, absolutely everyone. > > * **Even Hitler himself?** > > Yes. Well no, because he is dead. Otherwise, yes. > > * **But look at how mean he is. Surely not extremely mean people!?** > > There exist people in this world who hold, and act on, the most > disgusting, > vindictive, jealous, manipulative, abusive beliefs. They are not only > welcome > on the Scalaz project, but they have participated on the project, and > (mostly) > gone. That fact is a testament to the principle that all people are > welcome. > Absolutely everyone, even those who hold egregious beliefs, **and act on > them**, are welcome on the Scalaz project. > > This is not only hypothetically true, but has actually occurred. > > * **What about all the damage they did?** > > It is true that the Scalaz project went bad around 2013. The code quality > dropped significantly, and the previously established methods to learn > from > mistakes, and improve on them were systematically undermined by a > political > organisation, later calling themselves Typelevel. The code soon reached a > point where it was practically unusable. Efforts to fork and continue with > focussing on code were met with constant harrassment by political > proponents > when that was displayed publicly. The progress occurred nonetheless. > > Other approaches were taken publicly to resolving this problem. This > came at > a cost. > > * **Wait, Scalaz was never under Typelevel?** > > This is correct. Scalaz was never under an organisation called Typelevel. > Typelevel is a political organisation that demonstrates no interest in > code. > This political organisation excludes individuals, based on their > opinions, who > they are, or whether they subscribe to a manufactured "political > division". > For good or bad, this discrimination and politicking is in direct > opposition > to the principles of Scalaz. > > You may have read that Scalaz is somehow related to Typelevel. This is > just a > symptom of a political tactic that is in no way related to the Scalaz > project. > You will likely see other deceptions in the future. This is not a new > tactic. > It has been occurring for many years. You may not have noticed. If > that is the > case, please continue not noticing. It's to your benefit. > > Importantly, these political shenanigans and exclusive "bubble thinking" > invariably and eventually lead to shit code. Have a look at the > Typelevel code > for yourself. > > * **But it was written on the internet that Scalaz was under Typelevel?** > > People write all sorts of nonsense on the internet. You don't need me > to tell > you that. Somewhere you will find a story about how a pineapple flew from > outer space and landed on someone's head. This story is no different > in its > credibility, to the one that Scalaz is somehow related to Typelevel. > > Ignore it, make a comedy show of it, whatever. There is no obligation to > correct it, or take it seriously. > > * **So nobody ever agreed that Scalaz was related to Typelevel?** > > This is correct. There exist private meetings held by politicians > [programmers?] with an objective to manipulate public belief. There is no > other discussion about this. Under Scalaz proper, this nonsense has been > swiftly rejected, simply on the basis of the ultimate consequence; > degradation > in quality of code. > > * **Why didn't you correct it?** > > If I correct all the nonsense things on the internet, or even just for the > purpose of Scalaz, I'd have to become a politican myself. If there is > anything > useful to have learned from these politicking people, it is exactly > the human > that I never want to be. Correcting nonsense is not an obligation from me, > you, or anyone. > > Besides, it's fun to watch from the sideline. > > * **Isn't Typelevel (or similar) just a fork of Scalaz?** > > No. One jealous and vindictive individual has been trying this political > bullshit since 2006. Typelevel is just the next chapter in the political > motivations of this individual. If you fell for it, then I am sorry to > hear > it. That doesn't change the matters of fact though. > > * **If all people are welcome on Scalaz, then how will you prevent the > destruction of code and personal relationships that was caused in > 2013-2014?** > > By a software solution that is currently implemented as prototype. > Bullying in > Scala has been present since the beginning of Scalaz (2005), and is > likely to > always be that way. Scalaz survived 2005-2013 by presenting a > scapegoat to the > vicious motives of a small number of individuals who unrelentingly pursued > notoriety by constant abuse and harrassment. It was an effective > strategy, and > ultimately, Scalaz existed despite Scala, not because of it. Be proud > of that. > > A software solution provides a means for the project to continue on its > foundational principles (which are not to be compromised on), while > preventing > the destruction to code, and people, that we have witnessed. Not any > different > to a type system in a programming language, preventing bad code from > existing, > so too, can gross political ideas be prevented from achieving the eventual > practical penalty. > > * **But the Typelevel code looks the same as Scalaz?** > > Yes. The same people who wrote really shitty code into the Scalaz > codebase, > also copy/pasted it over to another codebase. None of it represents > Scalaz. > It's either a comedy show, or a giant defect, depending on your future > outlook. > > There currently does not exist a useful, general purpose library for > Scala. If > you care about Scala, change that. > > * **So if it is a defect, why hasn't it been fixed?** > > There is a strong correlation between "possessing the necessary > aptitude and > historical understanding to recognise that all of this was a hoax by a > political organisation, using the time-proven method of scapegoating" and > "possessing the necessary aptitude and historical understanding to > recognise > that writing Scala is itself an unproductive waste of time." Skilled > programmers, who have been down the hole and truly investigated the > merits of > Scala, have generally emerged with the same conclusion: it's a waste > of time. > This is not universally true of course, but is the general sentiment. > It's why > nobody bothers "fixing it", because the thing to fix, is not that thing. > > Additionally, a significant factor to the destruction to the code of the > Scalaz project was the imposition of bad processes for progress. > Fixing a bug > requires as much hoop-jumping than the consequences of the bug itself. > It is > impractical to fix the existing code, due to the amount of required effort > versus small return. This was not always true. Today it is true. > > * **What about the demands and threats? They scare me.** > > They are all bullshit. A complete load of nonsense with no coincidence to > reality. The product of delusions of grandeur, by one individual, > having zero > relationship to the Scalaz project in any way at all. Be assured, you can > dismiss them, one by one. Let's spend not-zero effort doing so. > > > behaviour in the #scalaz channel is unacceptable. > > Yes it is. It's totally fucking acceptable. > > Abusive people don't get to dictate the terms under which those abused > must > respond to that. We've had centuries of that. Time is up. If there is > any one > single point in this document to emphasise, it is that single one. It is > beneficial to dedicate a considerable effort coming to understanding it. > > > In particular, as steward of scalaz, I will not accept any insults to > community members. > > There is no steward of Scalaz. This proposition is both hilarious and > tragic. > > Also, insults are not only acceptable, but necessary to any productive > software team. One individual feels it necessary to impose on others > to "not > insult community members." This grand claim is simply technically > incorrect. > > Importantly, it was explicitly decided that Scalaz be this way, > accepting of > insults, in the first few weeks of its creation, and to its benefit. > Insults > very definitely are accepted. Anyone who tells you otherwise, needs a > tissue. > > The impositions you see here are powerless, and false, despite the > grandstanding. There is no obligation to correct it. > > "pfft I am insulted by boy bands" -- Steve Hughes > > > At all. Under no circumstances. > > A narcissist stomping their foot, punctuating with an excess > distribution of > full stops, is silent. > > > I will not accept discussion about that matter. > > This is fair. All people are welcome to be wrong, and remain so, at > their own > insistence. Sometimes it's fun. > > > You have clearly expressed your opinion about the code of conduct in the > channel, which is why I banned you from there permanently. > > This premise is factually false. It never occurred. > > > I can do that because I have talked to cofounders of the channel and > after > agreement, they transferred sole ownership to me. > > "My buddies agree with me in our private meetings" does not lend > credibility. > The actual (*actual*) contributors to the Scalaz project knew exactly > what was > going on immediately. We didn't even have to have a secret meeting. > Knowledgeable people knew, on their own independent thoughts. Amazing > that. > > Also, there were no "cofounders of the channel." There was one founder > of the > channel. > > Let's leave the history lesson there. Just know that it's all bullshit. > > > You have the choice to voluntarily pass over the ownership of the > list to me > and generally cease talking about scalaz in public. > > This is bullshit. Anyone can say anything they want about Scalaz. This > includes false things, even outrageous and ridiculous things. It is a > long-time tradition in fact. Talking about and observing nonsense > about Scalaz > is often a welcome relief. Indeed these "demands" are just one > instance in a > sea of comedy. Treat it like the hilarious load of bullshit that it > is; don't > let it frighten you. > > If anyone ever tells you that "you are not allowed to say something about > Scalaz", you can immediately know that they are full of shit. Dismiss the > claim swiftly and outright. You can even start saying you own it, or > steward > it, or benevolently dictate it, or whatever ridiculous thing you might > come up > with, and as we have actually seen in practice. You definitely can do > these > things. I won't even correct you. > > Further, if you have been threatened by an individual like this, then > there > are effective methods for dealing with it. Ask around for advice on how to > deal with it. In short, there are no "ultimatums" pertaining to > Scalaz, or any > of these (very typical) abusive tactics that you might encounter. They are > simply false. > > Importantly, this tactic has no power and it is important that you are not > frightened by it. If you need help with this, ask around. Help exists. It > truly does. > > > Judging by your tweets, you seem to have already made peace with > that idea > in general. If not, be assured that I have a fallback option. > > This idea of, "do as I say, and if you don't, I have a thing for you, > but I am > not telling you what it is" is a standard bullying tactic that can be > easily > disempowered. Ask around. This lording threat has absolutely no power > at all. > There exist experts who have dedicated their lives to dealing with > things like > this. You can be referred to them if you have been on the receiving end of > this type of abuse and need help. Ask around. There are people who > will help > you or point you in the direction of help. > > > I'm taking no answer in 24 hours as "please officially kick me out > with a > public statement". > > Again, there exist people who are genuinely frightened by the threats > of this > type. Be assured, this threat has no power at all. There is an entire > support > network of people to deal with it, including people who have specific > training > and have dedicated themselves full-time to dealing with it. Don't let > abusive people like this control your thoughts or actions. This is > important. > > > the good you do for the community is far outweighed by the bad you do. > > Says the individual who single-handedly degraded the code quality of > Scalaz to > "totally fucking unusable", played politics in an otherwise apolitical > code > project, thereby wrecking the personal relationships among the quality > contributors to the project. > > Ya gotta have a laugh. The incompetence. The awe. I need Tim-Tams. > > * **So what now then?** > > Simple. Write code, prevent destruction to that code by the usual means > (e.g. type system) and also prevent destruction by political means (a new > challenge). > > However, accept that there will never be another Scala project with the > productivity, skill diversity and inclusive acceptance of Scalaz > 2006-2013. > For detailed reasons, it will simply never occur again. Scalaz, the > project, > continues on, using the appropriate tool to solve a given software > problem. > The set of problems for which Scala is an appropriate solution, having a > cardinality of zero. > > On the surface, this appears to be a great loss. It would be, if Scala > itself > had anything at all going for it. Many people have recognised and come to > terms with the fact that Scala has no practical application, or any > chance for > future improvement. There is no significant loss. Scalaz does not rely on > Scala. > > * **Has all the abuse stopped then?** > > No. The self-appointed dictatorship has recently taken upon itself to > construct imaginary provocations, then present these to the employers of > opponents. If you feel threatened by this, there exist methods of > disempowerment of this tactic. Others have taken to making a game of > it, for > comedic relief. > > *Seek help if this occurs to you.* There exists help for dealing with this > form of ongoing abuse. > > A recent appointment as Grand Emperor of Scala (or whatever it is, > something > like that) may satiate the thirst for lording over others that compels > this > abuse, but other forms of relief are available if this one does not > succeed. > > * **What other principles apply to Scalaz?** > > Assume good faith, but taken very seriously. This was also discussed > early in > the project. It's why heated and productive arguments could occur in the > project, leading to the excellent result up to 2013. > > There is no compromise on executing this idea. All other principles > rest on > this one. As a thought exiercise, this is how you might come to know that > "steward of Scalaz" and much other nonsense never, ever existed. Try it. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scalaz" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/scalaz. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
