Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
On 8/1/21 11:01 PM, Bari wrote: Can we just call it -isms and -ists doing stuff? nah, terminology/definitions are important, I'd settle to call it a cancer of society though, and "stuff" them destroying it. On 8/1/21 11:32 PM, R C wrote: nah.. it's just a bunch of socialists/commies that discovered they too can claim the right to tell/demand etc. what others can say and do etc. it's a fascist/marxist global trend ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
Can we just call it -isms and -ists doing stuff? On 8/1/21 11:32 PM, R C wrote: nah.. it's just a bunch of socialists/commies that discovered they too can claim the right to tell/demand etc. what others can say and do etc. it's a fascist/marxist global trend ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
On 8/1/21 10:09 PM, Curtis Dutton wrote: I find it curious that we have a COC followed up by the "master" question in short succession. Am I mistaken that these events as somehow related? Just asking for a friend. I cannot think of a recent time that I have read an email on emcdev or emcusers that I thought to myself "something must be done about this" nor can I think of a time in the distant past where "things are getting out of hand here." nah.. it's just a bunch of socialists/commies that discovered they too can claim the right to tell/demand etc. what others can say and do etc. it's a fascist/marxist global trend Indeed I cannot think of a time where I found myself thinking "I don't think that person should have been banned." I would much prefer that admins be free to censure behavior based upon their own judgment. From what I can remember each of our admins have exercised their judgment quite well. They have performed their duties in general good faith without any proscribed policy. When we formalize commom sense rules it weakens faithful authoriy and provides an envelope within which corrupt authority can operate. I fear that policy may allow us to hide behind words, twist definitions and ultimately abuse power. I would strongly suggest that we make that small U-turn now and continue on the very productive path that we were previously following. On Sat, Jul 24, 2021, 8:22 AM Mark wrote: You really should be say it hasn't yet. Mark On 7/23/21 11:52 PM, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: Since you replied to my post: the topic is closed for me, I accept the CoC and move on, it doesn't affect my ability to be part of the LinuxCNC community nor my ability to share my work here and ask questions. Kind regards. ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
Oh that "master" question was on the dev list. Just us plebs in here. On 8/1/21 11:09 PM, Curtis Dutton wrote: I find it curious that we have a COC followed up by the "master" question in short succession. Am I mistaken that these events as somehow related? ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
I find it curious that we have a COC followed up by the "master" question in short succession. Am I mistaken that these events as somehow related? Just asking for a friend. I cannot think of a recent time that I have read an email on emcdev or emcusers that I thought to myself "something must be done about this" nor can I think of a time in the distant past where "things are getting out of hand here." Indeed I cannot think of a time where I found myself thinking "I don't think that person should have been banned." I would much prefer that admins be free to censure behavior based upon their own judgment. From what I can remember each of our admins have exercised their judgment quite well. They have performed their duties in general good faith without any proscribed policy. When we formalize commom sense rules it weakens faithful authoriy and provides an envelope within which corrupt authority can operate. I fear that policy may allow us to hide behind words, twist definitions and ultimately abuse power. I would strongly suggest that we make that small U-turn now and continue on the very productive path that we were previously following. On Sat, Jul 24, 2021, 8:22 AM Mark wrote: > You really should be say it hasn't yet. > > Mark > > On 7/23/21 11:52 PM, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: > > Since you replied to my post: the topic is closed for me, I accept the > > CoC and move on, it doesn't affect my ability to be part of the > > LinuxCNC community nor my ability to share my work here and ask > > questions. > > > > Kind regards. > > > > > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
You really should be say it hasn't yet. Mark On 7/23/21 11:52 PM, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: Since you replied to my post: the topic is closed for me, I accept the CoC and move on, it doesn't affect my ability to be part of the LinuxCNC community nor my ability to share my work here and ask questions. Kind regards. ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
Since you replied to my post: the topic is closed for me, I accept the CoC and move on, it doesn't affect my ability to be part of the LinuxCNC community nor my ability to share my work here and ask questions. Kind regards. On Fri, 2021-07-23 at 14:13 -0500, Bari wrote: > On 7/22/21 4:35 AM, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: > > > I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to > > rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of > > the > > site, and some projects have their own CoC. > > If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect > > you, unless you want to misbehave now. > > > > > They aren't adverse to some rules, just a dictated CoC. > > Other factors: > > Not obsessive-compulsive > > Some people have far less fear of the world around us due to > genetics, > psychotherapy, experience or maturity > > Lack of transparency > > Non democratic > > Subjective rules > > > An Updated Inquiry into the Study of Corporate Codes of Ethics: > 2005–2016 > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-019-04192-x#Sec28 > > > > > > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
On 7/22/21 4:35 AM, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the site, and some projects have their own CoC. If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect you, unless you want to misbehave now. They aren't adverse to some rules, just a dictated CoC. Other factors: Not obsessive-compulsive Some people have far less fear of the world around us due to genetics, psychotherapy, experience or maturity Lack of transparency Non democratic Subjective rules An Updated Inquiry into the Study of Corporate Codes of Ethics: 2005–2016 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-019-04192-x#Sec28 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
So it is the thought police, just in case you might say something offensive. I think I saw this movie a few years ago. It is strange to watch those that seem to want to be in control. On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 10:03:57 AM CDT, ken.stra...@gmail.com wrote: I think that you are missing the point. There MIGHT be something offensive and we have to be prepared to deal with a transgression. It's called being "proactive". More seriously and without my stupid PC hat on, such rules are completely unneeded and offensive! -Original Message- From: Scott Harwell via Emc-users Sent: July 22, 2021 10:29 AM To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) Cc: Scott Harwell Subject: Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli I'm a little slow on some of this. Could someone give me an example of a "rules violation" please refer to an actual post. I read every email and every recent topic post. In my unenlightened position I can't think of anything in the last year that I have seen that was offensive. Scott H On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 4:38:08 AM CDT, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the site, and some projects have their own CoC. If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect you, unless you want to misbehave now. On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > 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
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 17:13 +0200, grumpy via Emc-users wrote: > > > > From: Valerio Bellizzomi > > Sent: Thu Jul 22 11:35:44 CEST 2021 > > To: > > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli > > > > > > I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to > > rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of > > the > > site, and some projects have their own CoC. > > If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect > > you, unless you want to misbehave now. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > > > 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
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
> > From: Valerio Bellizzomi > Sent: Thu Jul 22 11:35:44 CEST 2021 > To: > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli > > > I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to > rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the > site, and some projects have their own CoC. > If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect > you, unless you want to misbehave now. > > > > On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > > 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 f
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
I think that you are missing the point. There MIGHT be something offensive and we have to be prepared to deal with a transgression. It's called being "proactive". More seriously and without my stupid PC hat on, such rules are completely unneeded and offensive! -Original Message- From: Scott Harwell via Emc-users Sent: July 22, 2021 10:29 AM To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) Cc: Scott Harwell Subject: Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli I'm a little slow on some of this. Could someone give me an example of a "rules violation" please refer to an actual post. I read every email and every recent topic post. In my unenlightened position I can't think of anything in the last year that I have seen that was offensive. Scott H On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 4:38:08 AM CDT, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the site, and some projects have their own CoC. If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect you, unless you want to misbehave now. On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > 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
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
Good luck finding one. The CoC is a solution in search of a problem. Mark On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 10:32 AM Scott Harwell via Emc-users < emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > I'm a little slow on some of this. Could someone give me an example of a > "rules violation" please refer to an actual post. I read every email and > every recent topic post. In my unenlightened position I can't think of > anything in the last year that I have seen that was offensive. > > Scott H > > > On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 4:38:08 AM CDT, Valerio Bellizzomi < > vale...@selnet.org> wrote: > > I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to > rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the > site, and some projects have their own CoC. > If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect > you, unless you want to misbehave now. > > > > On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > > 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
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
I'm a little slow on some of this. Could someone give me an example of a "rules violation" please refer to an actual post. I read every email and every recent topic post. In my unenlightened position I can't think of anything in the last year that I have seen that was offensive. Scott H On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 4:38:08 AM CDT, Valerio Bellizzomi wrote: I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the site, and some projects have their own CoC. If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect you, unless you want to misbehave now. On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > 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 ___ Emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the site, and some projects have their own CoC. If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect you, unless you want to misbehave now. On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > 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 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
https://forum.linuxcnc.org/29-forum-announcements/42898-linuxcnc-code-of-conduct "You cannot reply to this topic." And if he decides to not reply to you or anyone else, what are you or anyone else going to do about it? Not a threat, just asking. Should be clear how this was and will be handled by now and by whom. Whoever has admin, Op, kick, ban, etc. etc. status for the mail list, IRC, forums. wiki, etc.etc. On 7/22/21 2:02 AM, Bruce Layne wrote: 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. ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
[Emc-users] The Code Of Conduct Fait Accompli
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
