subject:"\[Pharo\-users\] Code of Conduct"

> But the low rate at which marginalized people are recruited, and
> the high rate at which they leave the industry
, point to a larger
> cultural and systemic problem.

Your interpreting this information with a SJW lens. Otherwise known as
"confirmation bias".  Look at the low proportion of blacks and women who
apply for CS majors in college. Are you going to say that colleges are
using discriminatory practices to keep blacks and women from taking CS
classes? Maybe the bulk of the low recruitment statistics is simply due to
non-interest within that sub-culture.

I believe this CoC is a way to wedge left-wing politics in a non-political
maillist. I want it out.

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 7:37 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:

> I agreed that the last decision should be on the ones who made the bulk
> of the work. But I don't see relationship between a code of conduct and
> not being able to talk about code or contributions quality. Just looking
> at the FAQ of the original CoC that originated the whole think, I see a
> lot of answers about the stuff being said on this thread (minorities,
> left wing progressive agenda, diminish of code quality because of it,
> mixing tech with non-tech stuff), so I will refer to it, because as I
> said, I think that the PR should be the place for the bulk of the
> discussion:
>
> https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq
>
> The FAQ name goes pretty well, considering the amount of repeated
> arguments they deal with. I think that many of the FAQ apply for other
> CoCs, despite of the possible different nature of CoC for the online
> community and the CoC for other face to face events. BTW, Thanks for the
> links, both provide a better context for the emergence of the CoC in the
> Erlang community.
>
> As said, I will try to see for specific contributions in the
> correspondent PR in the repo, and made some if I have a one. For the
> moment I'm trying to make my contributions on this thread, but is taking
> a lot.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
> On 22/09/19 7:40 p. m., Richard O'Keefe wrote:
> > This is not a question of left vs right.  It's a question of
> > authoritarian vs libertarian.
> > And this is very relevant to the community.
> > It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority.
> > It's a question of vs παρρησία vs goodspeak.
> > And this is very relevant to the community also.
> >
> > Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it,
> > and they are kind enough to share it with us.  That there is such a
> > thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work.
> >
> > That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the ability
> of
> > that community to communicate freely.  This cuts BOTH ways.  If people
> are
> > scared off by incivility, that's bad.  If people are driven away by
> incivility,
> > that's bad.  But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may be
> > amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and
> that
> > is bad too.
> >
> > Let's consider a recent thread.  I took the position that << and putOn:
> were
> > confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary.  The unreliability issue has been
> > addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have
> learned
> > that.  Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where
> I find
> > that << impairs my ability to understand.  The fact that BOTH sides were
> able
> > to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus for
> > removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read
> your
> > code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all
> better off.
> > But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the
> thread
> > would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a
> generalisation
> > that is worth having if << is worth having at all.
> >
> > I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct
> > http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt
> > It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for
> forgiveness.
> >
> > A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring
> > Erlang up.
> > http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html
> > is eye-opening.  (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.)
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> >  wrote:
> >> My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones,
> is not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in
> human endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on.
> >>
> >> I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code
> repository and the PR. See you there.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> >>
> >> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there
> haven't been any problems on

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

I agreed that the last decision should be on the ones who made the bulk
of the work. But I don't see relationship between a code of conduct and
not being able to talk about code or contributions quality. Just looking
at the FAQ of the original CoC that originated the whole think, I see a
lot of answers about the stuff being said on this thread (minorities,
left wing progressive agenda, diminish of code quality because of it,
mixing tech with non-tech stuff), so I will refer to it, because as I
said, I think that the PR should be the place for the bulk of the
discussion:

https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq

The FAQ name goes pretty well, considering the amount of repeated
arguments they deal with. I think that many of the FAQ apply for other
CoCs, despite of the possible different nature of CoC for the online
community and the CoC for other face to face events. BTW, Thanks for the
links, both provide a better context for the emergence of the CoC in the
Erlang community.

As said, I will try to see for specific contributions in the
correspondent PR in the repo, and made some if I have a one. For the
moment I'm trying to make my contributions on this thread, but is taking
a lot.

Cheers,

Offray

On 22/09/19 7:40 p. m., Richard O'Keefe wrote:
> This is not a question of left vs right.  It's a question of
> authoritarian vs libertarian.
> And this is very relevant to the community.
> It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority.
> It's a question of vs παρρησία vs goodspeak.
> And this is very relevant to the community also.
>
> Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it,
> and they are kind enough to share it with us.  That there is such a
> thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work.
>
> That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the ability of
> that community to communicate freely.  This cuts BOTH ways.  If people are
> scared off by incivility, that's bad.  If people are driven away by 
> incivility,
> that's bad.  But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may be
> amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and that
> is bad too.
>
> Let's consider a recent thread.  I took the position that << and putOn: were
> confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary.  The unreliability issue has been
> addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have learned
> that.  Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where I find
> that << impairs my ability to understand.  The fact that BOTH sides were able
> to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus for
> removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read your
> code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all better 
> off.
> But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the thread
> would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a generalisation
> that is worth having if << is worth having at all.
>
> I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct
> http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt
> It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for 
> forgiveness.
>
> A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring
> Erlang up.
> http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html
> is eye-opening.  (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.)
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>  wrote:
>> My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones, is 
>> not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in human 
>> endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on.
>>
>> I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code 
>> repository and the PR. See you there.
>>
>>
>> On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>>
>> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there haven't 
>> been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This is just a 
>> group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on everyone 
>> else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it with one 
>> line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic".
>>
>> If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs left 
>> / thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other sub, 
>> but it's offtopic here.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas 
>>  wrote:
>>> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free, 
>>> libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality of 
>>> code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be a 
>>> democracy, the earth would be "still" flat.
>>>
>>> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>>>
>>> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This should 
>>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-22 Thread Richard O'Keefe

This is not a question of left vs right.  It's a question of
authoritarian vs libertarian.
And this is very relevant to the community.
It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority.
It's a question of vs παρρησία vs goodspeak.
And this is very relevant to the community also.

Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it,
and they are kind enough to share it with us.  That there is such a
thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work.

That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the ability of
that community to communicate freely.  This cuts BOTH ways.  If people are
scared off by incivility, that's bad.  If people are driven away by incivility,
that's bad.  But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may be
amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and that
is bad too.

Let's consider a recent thread.  I took the position that << and putOn: were
confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary.  The unreliability issue has been
addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have learned
that.  Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where I find
that << impairs my ability to understand.  The fact that BOTH sides were able
to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus for
removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read your
code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all better off.
But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the thread
would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a generalisation
that is worth having if << is worth having at all.

I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct
http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt
It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for forgiveness.

A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring
Erlang up.
http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html
is eye-opening.  (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.)

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
 wrote:
>
> My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones, is not 
> a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in human 
> endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on.
>
> I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code repository 
> and the PR. See you there.
>
>
> On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>
> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there haven't 
> been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This is just a 
> group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on everyone 
> else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it with one line: 
> "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic".
>
> If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs left / 
> thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other sub, but 
> it's offtopic here.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas 
>  wrote:
>>
>> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free, 
>> libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality of 
>> code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be a 
>> democracy, the earth would be "still" flat.
>>
>> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>>
>> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This should 
>> be a democracy.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas 
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>>> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many
>>> >
>>> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to many".
>>>
>>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others
>>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on
>>> that and invest time and effort accordingly.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Offray
>>>
>>>
>>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones,
is not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits
in human endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on.

I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code
repository and the PR. See you there.


On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there
> haven't been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever.
> This is just a group of people trying to enforce their political
> ideologies on everyone else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and
> just replace it with one line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything
> else is offtopic".
>
> If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs
> left / thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some
> other sub, but it's offtopic here.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> mailto:offray.l...@mutabit.com>> wrote:
>
> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so,
> free, libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine
> the quality of code or argumentation based on perceived
> majorities? If science would be a democracy, the earth would be
> "still" flat.
>
> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it.
>> This should be a democracy.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>> mailto:offray.l...@mutabit.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction
>> to many 
>> >
>> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a
>> distraction to many".
>>
>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction,
>> others
>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own
>> opinion on
>> that and invest time and effort accordingly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Offray
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there haven't
been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This is just a
group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on everyone
else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it with one
line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic".

If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs left
/ thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other sub,
but it's offtopic here.

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:

> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free,
> libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality of
> code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be a
> democracy, the earth would be "still" flat.
> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>
> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This should
> be a democracy.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
> offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many
>> >
>> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to many".
>>
>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others
>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on
>> that and invest time and effort accordingly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Offray
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free,
libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality
of code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would
be a democracy, the earth would be "still" flat.

On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This
> should be a democracy.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> mailto:offray.l...@mutabit.com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many 
> >
> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to
> many".
>
> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others
> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on
> that and invest time and effort accordingly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This should
be a democracy.

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:

>
> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many
> >
> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to many".
>
> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others
> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on
> that and invest time and effort accordingly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many 
>
> Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to many".

Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others
don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on
that and invest time and effort accordingly.

Cheers,

Offray

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

> The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many

Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to many".

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 10:12 AM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 21/09/19 11:38 p. m., Jerry Kott wrote:
> > The point here is: as a community, Pharo (and other Smalltalk groups)
> > has a lot of work to do. Code of Conduct is an unnecessary and
> > wasteful distraction. In the meantime, I see no discussions here about
> > how are we going to address the world-wide crisis of Privacy Erosion,
> > or how to establish ethical coding best practices. How can we ensure
> > that information collected as a result of our work remains
> > confidential and secure where needed, and is used ethically for the
> > betterment of the planet and the human race?
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Happy Autumnal Equinox, everyone!
>
>
> The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many and
> the ones who think so, should be leading by not being distracted with
> long threads and emails, and also showing how to start and continue the
> discussions and projects on the topics they care about here and in the
> repositories. I, for example, have a concern about data and privacy and
> the way it influences our vision and shape of the world. Maybe we can
> share some interest and projects on that front.
>
> Here, we don't have proper seasons, but I wish everyone interesting and
> insightful times where ever you are.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Hi,

On 21/09/19 11:38 p. m., Jerry Kott wrote:
> The point here is: as a community, Pharo (and other Smalltalk groups)
> has a lot of work to do. Code of Conduct is an unnecessary and
> wasteful distraction. In the meantime, I see no discussions here about
> how are we going to address the world-wide crisis of Privacy Erosion,
> or how to establish ethical coding best practices. How can we ensure
> that information collected as a result of our work remains
> confidential and secure where needed, and is used ethically for the
> betterment of the planet and the human race?
>
> [...]
>
> Happy Autumnal Equinox, everyone!

The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many and
the ones who think so, should be leading by not being distracted with
long threads and emails, and also showing how to start and continue the
discussions and projects on the topics they care about here and in the
repositories. I, for example, have a concern about data and privacy and
the way it influences our vision and shape of the world. Maybe we can
share some interest and projects on that front.

Here, we don't have proper seasons, but I wish everyone interesting and
insightful times where ever you are.

Cheers,

Offray

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-21 Thread Jerry Kott

Just… WOW.

I’ve been fighting the urge to add my two cents to the discussion, but didn’t 
feel ‘qualified’ - I’ve been just lurking here, both on the mailing list and 
this topic. I haven’t contributed to Pharo (yet), but any discussion that 
involves freedom of expression (which this is I believe) naturally piques my 
interest.

I only read the Code of Conduct version as of today, and while on surface it’s 
not that controversial (any longer), if I had any say in the subject, I would 
vote against any form or shape of it. Many have expressed their reasons, here 
are just some of mine:

The wording can change at any time (as we have seen over last couple of weeks), 
without any real accountability of the CoC authors/editors to the community. 
That alone should be a red flag. I have a somewhat remotely related example of 
that: In 1948, a single added sentence in the Constitution of my country 
changed it from a fledgling democracy to a brutal dictatorship that lasted 
forty years. ‘Foundational documents’ are extremely difficult to get right - 
whatever ‘right’ means.
Almost every CoC I have seen in recent times, in communities online and in the 
real world, reminds me this: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Code_of_the_Builder_of_Communism 
 . Read 
the twelve rules. Shivers run up my spine when I see the similarities between 
that and modern Code of Conduct wordings. This was displayed in schools and 
other public building when I was growing up. Nobody I knew followed it, but it 
could be used arbitrarily to mark people as ‘enemies’ and discriminate against 
them - the very antithesis of tolerance and inclusivity.
(I repeat what others said) This is a predominantly technical forum, albeit 
with some creative aspects. I borrow a phrase here: ‘Any good idea withstands 
scrutiny’. Knowing that should be enough of an incentive to be thoughtful and 
respectful. That doesn’t mean you can’t fight for your idea (on the contrary), 
and fighting sometimes requires some strong words. Get over it. Life’s not 
‘easy’, ’safe’, or ‘fair’.
I don’t see a problem on this list (or even in the wider Pharo/Smalltalk 
community) that needs solving or gets solved by a CoC. Why waste our energy on 
something that is not a problem?

If everything else got half of attention as this topic, wouldn’t that be 
awesome? Ultimately this is about human behviour, and as we know, that’s always 
the hardest thing to change/influence in any field. Speaking of which:

How is that security stuff coming along, Pharo community? Two years in the row 
my ESUG presentations included screenshots of a Pharo-backed web site, pointing 
out how insecure the site is. Details have been blurred to protect the site, 
but anyone who does Pharo/Seaside work should be alerted if they paid 
attention. I know that the maintainers of the site were in the audience, and I 
am amazed that they have not checked their site to see if they have some work 
to do to address the vulnerabilities. Note: this is not unique to Pharo. It’s a 
simple change in behaviour that should have happened, but it has not.

The point here is: as a community, Pharo (and other Smalltalk groups) has a lot 
of work to do. Code of Conduct is an unnecessary and wasteful distraction. In 
the meantime, I see no discussions here about how are we going to address the 
world-wide crisis of Privacy Erosion, or how to establish ethical coding best 
practices. How can we ensure that information collected as a result of our work 
remains confidential and secure where needed, and is used ethically for the 
betterment of the planet and the human race?

I don't give a rat’s ass about following a community Code of Conduct if it 
silences what I or others have to say in public, while our most private, 
personal data is harvested left and right by unscrupulous geeks in Silicon 
Valley and elsewhere. That’s a problem we should be trying to solve.

There. Stepping down from the soap box.

Happy Autumnal Equinox, everyone!

Jerry Kott
This message has been digitally signed.
PGP Fingerprint:
A9181736DD2F1B6CC7CF9E51AC8514F48C0979A5

> On 21-09-2019, at 9:51 AM, Steve Quezadas  wrote:
> 
> My issue is that this covenant is selectively applied to some things, but not 
> others. The wording might change, but the cultural attitude will prevail on 
> how it gets "enforced". Again, the best thing to do is simply keep it neutral 
> and anything not related to pharo get thrown out as "off-topic".
> 
> Harassment has never been a problem with this list. And any talk about the 
> danger of "nazis" or "thugs" is irrelevent and should be thrown out. I, for 
> one, don't want to see it on this list.
> 
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 9:36 AM James Foster  > wrote:
> A nice thing about open source and the use of Git is that changes can be 
> proposed and adopted quickly. Any proposal should be judged, not on whether 
> it is

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-21 Thread Steve Quezadas

My issue is that this covenant is selectively applied to some things, but
not others. The wording might change, but the cultural attitude will
prevail on how it gets "enforced". Again, the best thing to do is simply
keep it neutral and anything not related to pharo get thrown out as
"off-topic".

Harassment has never been a problem with this list. And any talk about the
danger of "nazis" or "thugs" is irrelevent and should be thrown out. I, for
one, don't want to see it on this list.

On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 9:36 AM James Foster  wrote:

> A nice thing about open source and the use of Git is that changes can be
> proposed and adopted quickly. Any proposal should be judged, not on whether
> it is perfect, but whether it makes an improvement. As a corollary, don’t
> assume that the current state is the ideal, but treat it as a platform for
> continuous improvements.
>
> In this case, the phrase you objected to was removed before you made your
> comment.
>
> James
>
> > On Sep 20, 2019, at 11:43 PM, Hilaire  wrote:
> >
> > Le 19/09/2019 à 21:20, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
> >>
> >> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can
> >> serve our community, you can see it here:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
> >>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Given the heat up on the ml, I took a look on the PR. It looks honest
> > and simple for but...
> >
> > ...I am really surprised -- worried will be more accurate ! -- by the
> > second part of this sentence[1]. I think it is even dangerous! What is
> > happening outside of the Pharo community should not be ruled by the
> > 'WE'. The 'WE' is not the universal moral police or justice. If you
> > think a bit about the Richard Stallman event, he was forced to withdraw
> > of the Free Software Foundation because comments he made in a mailing
> > list not related to FSF. He wrote his email contents were misinterpreted
> > (and we know it happens often) and used against him. Whatever it is true
> > or not, I don't see why you should be socially banned (or socially
> > killed) from one place (or more like all place) because of what happen
> > in another place. This kind of important decision can only be taken by
> > the justice where all matter are taken in consideration. Imagine one of
> > you kicked out of Pharo community because you loose your mind in another
> > channel? It makes me feel a bit like the Aldous Huxley world.
> >
> > [1] /We will not tolerate harassment from anyone in the Pharo community,
> > even outside of Pharo’s public communication channels./
> >
> > Hilaire
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Geo
> > http://drgeo.eu
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-21 Thread James Foster

A nice thing about open source and the use of Git is that changes can be 
proposed and adopted quickly. Any proposal should be judged, not on whether it 
is perfect, but whether it makes an improvement. As a corollary, don’t assume 
that the current state is the ideal, but treat it as a platform for continuous 
improvements.

In this case, the phrase you objected to was removed before you made your 
comment.

James

> On Sep 20, 2019, at 11:43 PM, Hilaire  wrote:
> 
> Le 19/09/2019 à 21:20, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
>> 
>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can
>> serve our community, you can see it here: 
>> 
>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>> 
> Hello,
> 
> Given the heat up on the ml, I took a look on the PR. It looks honest
> and simple for but...
> 
> ...I am really surprised -- worried will be more accurate ! -- by the
> second part of this sentence[1]. I think it is even dangerous! What is
> happening outside of the Pharo community should not be ruled by the
> 'WE'. The 'WE' is not the universal moral police or justice. If you
> think a bit about the Richard Stallman event, he was forced to withdraw
> of the Free Software Foundation because comments he made in a mailing
> list not related to FSF. He wrote his email contents were misinterpreted
> (and we know it happens often) and used against him. Whatever it is true
> or not, I don't see why you should be socially banned (or socially
> killed) from one place (or more like all place) because of what happen
> in another place. This kind of important decision can only be taken by
> the justice where all matter are taken in consideration. Imagine one of
> you kicked out of Pharo community because you loose your mind in another
> channel? It makes me feel a bit like the Aldous Huxley world.
> 
> [1] /We will not tolerate harassment from anyone in the Pharo community,
> even outside of Pharo’s public communication channels./
> 
> Hilaire
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Geo
> http://drgeo.eu
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-21 Thread Stephan Eggermont

Ramon Leon  wrote:
>
> It's not, identity politics are left wing politics

That requires using a definition of left wing politics where neo-nazis and
alt-right are left wing. That definition is not common here in Western
Europe. 

I’m happy for you and that you have enough privilege that you can afford to
ignore politics. 

Stephan

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-21 Thread Hilaire

Le 19/09/2019 à 21:20, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
>
> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can
> serve our community, you can see it here: 
>
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>
Hello,

Given the heat up on the ml, I took a look on the PR. It looks honest
and simple for but...

...I am really surprised -- worried will be more accurate ! -- by the
second part of this sentence[1]. I think it is even dangerous! What is
happening outside of the Pharo community should not be ruled by the
'WE'. The 'WE' is not the universal moral police or justice. If you
think a bit about the Richard Stallman event, he was forced to withdraw
of the Free Software Foundation because comments he made in a mailing
list not related to FSF. He wrote his email contents were misinterpreted
(and we know it happens often) and used against him. Whatever it is true
or not, I don't see why you should be socially banned (or socially
killed) from one place (or more like all place) because of what happen
in another place. This kind of important decision can only be taken by
the justice where all matter are taken in consideration. Imagine one of
you kicked out of Pharo community because you loose your mind in another
channel? It makes me feel a bit like the Aldous Huxley world.

[1] /We will not tolerate harassment from anyone in the Pharo community,
even outside of Pharo’s public communication channels./

Hilaire

-- 
Dr. Geo
http://drgeo.eu

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Steve Quezadas

FYI, Richard Stallman got "cancelled" out of his life's work because some
silly side-comment trigged some "woke" individual out there. In the real
world, covenants are often used as an excuse to silence someone with an
implicit threat because he said something that someone didn't want to
hear,  whatever that may be.

This list was fine without it, we don't have any problems, just replace it
with "keep the subject matter on pharo, anything else is off-topic"

On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 3:11 PM Ramon Leon  wrote:

> On 2019-09-20 3:03 p.m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> > I think the "covenant" should be a single line: "keep the subject matter
> on
> > pharo, anything else is off-topic".
> >
> > This list should be politically neutral.
>
> I agree. The leadership apparently does not, left wing social justice
> identity politics is now embedded into the community rules. Guess we'll see
> what happens when outsiders start trying to use it to cancel people as is
> happening just about everywhere these CoC's are introduced.
>
> --
> Ramón León
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas

Hi,

For me is kind of curious how all this discussion on the Code of Conduct
has showed some hidden assumptions. For example, it seems that having
one and mentioning identity in it shows from a left wing progressive
agenda, but not having any or not talking about identity doesn't show
a... "right wing regressive agenda", is just normal. Also the hidden
agendas when identity is mentioned are for the Pharo Community, no for
the ACM or hundreds of technical communities out there that exist
decades ago and even have the word "identity" before the times when
there is a direct causal relation between such world and hidden agendas.

Technology and code exist "ex nihilo", without any context to be
considered. I would like that the immigration guards think the same, any
time I go to a technical conference and I almost always get the totally
random and "lucky" extra line because my Colombian password and the
eventual "joke" about Pablo Escobar from some people at immigration.
Fortunately my code talks for me because is just a technical community
meeting in another country and this extra immigration time and paperwork
is just in my imagination in this neutral and apolitical world where
technology is developed. Ohh and funding and free time for development,
is so not related on where are you located. Ethnicity is just a happy
accident that has no relation with identity.

After my argumentation by counter example, is good to see that some
other people is willing to compromise, and think outside their own
(privileged?) position. I don't want my code to be accepted because of
my passport, but I don't think neither that code exists ex nihilo, as
experience have showed me how context influences the time/resources I
can put behind my code and participation in community spaces.

I think that a community that recognizes diversity and is willing to
compromise is being showed in the CoC construction process: I like the
way the original punitive tone was replaced with a specific suggestion
giving opportunity for both sides, how this was taken into account by
the board and the feedback was constructive in the PR and its acceptance.

Cheers,

Offray

On 20/09/19 12:34 p. m., Ramon Leon wrote:
> On 2019-09-20 7:44 a.m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
>> Or maybe you're too easily offended and the problem lies with you.
>
> It's fairly obvious now, the Pharo leadership is occupied by left wing
> progressives who are intent on bringing identity politics into the
> community. While the new CoC is vastly better in its current state, it
> still insists one the left wing political ideology of respecting
> people's chosen identities as if that has any bearing at all on anything.
>
> * One's identity is not relevant in a technical forum.
> * One's code is not better because of one's identity.
> * One's arguments are not more sound because of one's identity.
> * Ones point of view are not more important because of one's identity.
>
> Any calls to respect someone's identity are thinly veiled attempts to
> impose objectionable left wing political language onto the community.
> I don't care how anyone identifies, but I'm under no obligation to
> play along and it is not disrespectful to disagree with these
> political beliefs. The maintenance of ones identity and self image is
> theirs to worry about, I have no obligation to support the maintenance
> of someone else's ego. You can identify as a pink unicorn for all I
> care, but no I do not have to respect that or play along.  Nor will I.
>
> I'm saying this here because the pull request to remove the word
> identity was rejected without explanation, discussion, or comment.
> Progressives seem intent on ruining everything.
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Ramon Leon


On 2019-09-20 3:03 p.m., Steve Quezadas wrote:

I think the "covenant" should be a single line: "keep the subject matter on
pharo, anything else is off-topic".

This list should be politically neutral.


I agree. The leadership apparently does not, left wing social justice identity 
politics is now embedded into the community rules. Guess we'll see what happens 
when outsiders start trying to use it to cancel people as is happening just 
about everywhere these CoC's are introduced.

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Steve Quezadas

I think the "covenant" should be a single line: "keep the subject matter on
pharo, anything else is off-topic".

This list should be politically neutral. I personally hate politics because
neither side ever gets the other side to "see the light". It's a religous
argument basically. The problem is is that people tend to believe whatever
everyone else believes in their particular culture/time and you get this
militant ideology based out of it. And that's fine and dandy, but it has no
place here. The reason I come here is of the helpful community full of
bright programmers who are using the right paradigms of thought.

- Steve

On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 2:59 PM Ramon Leon  wrote:

> On 2019-09-20 12:33 p.m., Ben Coman wrote:
>
> A fair response Ben.
>
> > A good compromise is sometimes said to be when opposing parties are>
> **equally** dissatisfied.
>
> The new version is much better, I believe I said that.  James and Norbert
> made some final and excellent changes that mostly fixed what was wrong and
> removed the overreach and the lack of due process.
>
> > That feels to me like an extreme interpretation.
>
> It's not, identity politics are left wing politics and putting them in the
> CoC is absolutely imposing them on the community. I guess we'll see how it
> goes.
>
> --
> Ramón León
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Ramon Leon


On 2019-09-20 12:33 p.m., Ben Coman wrote:

A fair response Ben.


A good compromise is sometimes said to be when opposing parties are> 
**equally** dissatisfied.


The new version is much better, I believe I said that.  James and Norbert made 
some final and excellent changes that mostly fixed what was wrong and removed 
the overreach and the lack of due process.


That feels to me like an extreme interpretation.


It's not, identity politics are left wing politics and putting them in the CoC 
is absolutely imposing them on the community. I guess we'll see how it goes.

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Ben Coman

On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 01:35, Ramon Leon  wrote:

> On 2019-09-20 7:44 a.m., Steve Quezadas wrote:
> > Or maybe you're too easily offended and the problem lies with you.
>

Its all too easy for threads to drag out tit for tat.
I'd be impressed to see who can take the high road to wrap this up.

btw, you know why my wife always gets the last word in an argument?
Because the next thing I say is the start of a new argument.

> It's fairly obvious now, the Pharo leadership is occupied by left wing
> progressives who are intent on bringing identity politics into the
> community.

Thats not the impression I get, otherwise the full Contributor Covenant
would still be being rammed down your throat.

The impression I get is that its easy to think the full CC is a good thing
without being aware of its negative perceptions and consequences.
The original PR seems to have been accepted on that basis (and maybe even
submitted on that basis)
The board seems to have now taken account of opposing viewpoints and
determined a middle path.
That seems far from being a left wing progressive.

> While the new CoC is vastly better in its current state, it still insists
> one the left wing political ideology of respecting people's chosen
> identities as if that has any bearing at all on anything.
>

In a broad community like ours there will always be diverse opinions.
Often the only way forward is compromise.
If you are not compromising, then you are dictating, and there is no place
for that on non-technical topics.

A good compromise is sometimes said to be when opposing parties are
**equally** dissatisfied.
So if you are remain dissatisfied with the current simplified Code of
Conduct,
please balance how dissatisfied your nemesis would be with the result.

Any calls to respect someone's identity are thinly veiled attempts to
> impose objectionable left wing political language onto the community.

That feels to me like an extreme interpretation.

> I don't care how anyone identifies, but I'm under no obligation to play
> along and

> it is not disrespectful to disagree with these political beliefs.

Agreed, except contending the Pharo leadership are left wing progressives
and "progressives a ruining everything" is getting close...

I'm saying this here because the pull request to remove the word identity
> was rejected without explanation, discussion, or comment.

...when I'd guess it was more likely:
* they feel what they now have is a sufficiently good compromise
* the term "identity" didn't carry the same weight with them so the PR
seemed frivolous
* want to back to real work quick as possible
* felt under no obligation to play along with every extreme viewpoint (your
viewpoint is valid for you, but is at the other extreme from progressives)

That said, some comment would have helped

Overall I believe the board did a good job determining a middle path and
want to thank them for their decisive action.

I will finish by saying, going forward I hope we don't have a hair trigger
sensitivity against the odd slip.
That has its own consequence in not being welcoming of diverse people.
We're not robots and its hard to be completely mindful all the time.  Its
more about pattern of behaviour.
Also, if you do slip and are called out on something, take a moment to
consider that others may have personal experience that makes them
sensitivite.
So when someone's toes are stepped on, its okay for them to say "Ow" and
then both parties leave it at that.

Lets get back to work.
cheers -ben

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Ramon Leon


On 2019-09-20 7:44 a.m., Steve Quezadas wrote:

Or maybe you're too easily offended and the problem lies with you.


It's fairly obvious now, the Pharo leadership is occupied by left wing 
progressives who are intent on bringing identity politics into the community. 
While the new CoC is vastly better in its current state, it still insists one 
the left wing political ideology of respecting people's chosen identities as if 
that has any bearing at all on anything.

* One's identity is not relevant in a technical forum.
* One's code is not better because of one's identity.
* One's arguments are not more sound because of one's identity.
* Ones point of view are not more important because of one's identity.

Any calls to respect someone's identity are thinly veiled attempts to impose 
objectionable left wing political language onto the community. I don't care how 
anyone identifies, but I'm under no obligation to play along and it is not 
disrespectful to disagree with these political beliefs. The maintenance of ones 
identity and self image is theirs to worry about, I have no obligation to 
support the maintenance of someone else's ego. You can identify as a pink 
unicorn for all I care, but no I do not have to respect that or play along.  
Nor will I.

I'm saying this here because the pull request to remove the word identity was 
rejected without explanation, discussion, or comment. Progressives seem intent 
on ruining everything.

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Steve Quezadas

> That wording is an insult to all people that support a leftist vision of
the world.

Or maybe you're too easily offended and the problem lies with you.


On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 3:56 AM Sven Van Caekenberghe  wrote:

> I carefully worded my reply:
>
> saying "I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of
> Conduct”.
>
> - is off topic
> - is political
> - implies a value judgement
>
> I tried to not reason against it, I am just saying that it has no place
> here.
>
> > On 20 Sep 2019, at 12:30, PBKResearch  wrote:
> >
> > Sven
> > I think all your complaints against John Pfersich are misconceived:
> > 1. He is talking about the content of the code, which is exactly the
> topic of the thread.
> > 2. He is claiming that the code as drafted has a political slant. This
> may be true, false or a matter of opinion, but to discuss whether it is so
> is not in any way introducing politics.
> > 3. I see nothing in his words which makes a value judgement about
> anybody.
> > I see a censoriousness in your comments which is worrying. Just recently
> you said, 'Guns have no place in a civilised society', which was certainly
> a value judgement, specifically about John Pfersich. Please stop.
> >
> > Peter Kenny
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of
> Sven Van Caekenberghe
> > Sent: 20 September 2019 10:11
> > To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 20 Sep 2019, at 06:17, john pfersich  wrote:
> >>
> >> I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of
> Conduct”.
> >
> > You are violating the implicit rules of engagement in this mailing list:
> you are going off topic, you are using this platform to talk about politics
> and you are giving value judgements about others. Please stop.
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Cyril Ferlicot

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 9:21 PM Esteban Lorenzano  wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here.
> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it much 
> because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our community 
> has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it fine until 
> now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a real 
> situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover.
> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case.
>
> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
> it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put them 
> back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct.
>
> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
> our community, you can see it here:
>
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>
> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
> discuss it and propose modifications.
> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>
> Cheers,
> Esteban
>
> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of our 
> community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible 
> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was 
> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him, 
> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be 
> sent :)
>
>

Hi,

Thank you for taking care of this.

I find this CoC better than the previous one but there is one point
that I would like to discuss.

> «removing issues, comments, and PRs or blocking accounts as deemed 
> appropriate.»

I am not sure that removing completly the content is good. I already
saw communities using this as a way of moderating content and it
caused two unwanted consequences:
- The moderators deleted abusivly contents saying it did not respect
the CoC without letting the person explain itself or discuting if if
was a real disrespect of the CoC
- The people getting their post removed used that to act as a martyr
since the proof of their disrespect vanished and since they say they
are victim of censure.

I am the most worried about the second consequence.

I solution adopted by some communities is to remove the messages from
the original source to not promote disrespect, but keep a version in a
"Moderated content" section.

For the Pharo community we could for example have a github repository,
or a folder files.pharo.org or any other public solution called
"Moderated content" were we could save the screens of the removed
comments.
This would act as proof of the disespect and prevent the apparition of martyrs.

What do you think about this?

-- 
Cyril Ferlicot
https://ferlicot.fr

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Esteban Lorenzano

You are wrong. 

You can favour or be against a code of conduct. 
You can have any judgement about the community and how the community 
work/should work.
You can leave or you can stay in places that matches 100% or just partially 
your ideology. 

What you cannot do is to bash people because they think differently. 

And that phrase was meant to bash an ideology, not to argument against the CoC. 

So yes, he is out of place. 

> On 20 Sep 2019, at 12:30, PBKResearch  wrote:
> 
> Sven
> I think all your complaints against John Pfersich are misconceived:
> 1. He is talking about the content of the code, which is exactly the topic of 
> the thread.

Yes, and he is insulting the people sustaining it.

> 2. He is claiming that the code as drafted has a political slant. This may be 
> true, false or a matter of opinion, but to discuss whether it is so is not in 
> any way introducing politics.

introducing it as a negative fact is misleading. 
Also it was phrased in a way that despise others. 

> 3. I see nothing in his words which makes a value judgement about anybody.

Then I recommend you to read again more carefully: 
- That wording is an insult to all people that support a leftist vision of the 
world.
- That wording bashes a position without argument (is bad because is from the 
left).

> I see a censoriousness in your comments which is worrying. Just recently you 
> said, 'Guns have no place in a civilised society', which was certainly a 
> value judgement, specifically about John Pfersich. Please stop.

Using some older discussion as a way to create arguments into a new discussion 
is called “fallacy ad hominem” and is not a good way to defend your arguments.
So, I ask you: Please stop.

Esteban

> 
> Peter Kenny
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Sven Van 
> Caekenberghe
> Sent: 20 September 2019 10:11
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
> 
> 
> 
>> On 20 Sep 2019, at 06:17, john pfersich  wrote:
>> 
>> I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 
> 
> You are violating the implicit rules of engagement in this mailing list: you 
> are going off topic, you are using this platform to talk about politics and 
> you are giving value judgements about others. Please stop.
> 
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Sven Van Caekenberghe

I carefully worded my reply: 

saying "I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of 
Conduct”.

- is off topic
- is political
- implies a value judgement

I tried to not reason against it, I am just saying that it has no place here.

> On 20 Sep 2019, at 12:30, PBKResearch  wrote:
> 
> Sven
> I think all your complaints against John Pfersich are misconceived:
> 1. He is talking about the content of the code, which is exactly the topic of 
> the thread.
> 2. He is claiming that the code as drafted has a political slant. This may be 
> true, false or a matter of opinion, but to discuss whether it is so is not in 
> any way introducing politics.
> 3. I see nothing in his words which makes a value judgement about anybody.
> I see a censoriousness in your comments which is worrying. Just recently you 
> said, 'Guns have no place in a civilised society', which was certainly a 
> value judgement, specifically about John Pfersich. Please stop.
> 
> Peter Kenny
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Sven Van 
> Caekenberghe
> Sent: 20 September 2019 10:11
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
> 
> 
> 
>> On 20 Sep 2019, at 06:17, john pfersich  wrote:
>> 
>> I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 
> 
> You are violating the implicit rules of engagement in this mailing list: you 
> are going off topic, you are using this platform to talk about politics and 
> you are giving value judgements about others. Please stop.
> 
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread PBKResearch

Sven
I think all your complaints against John Pfersich are misconceived:
1. He is talking about the content of the code, which is exactly the topic of 
the thread.
2. He is claiming that the code as drafted has a political slant. This may be 
true, false or a matter of opinion, but to discuss whether it is so is not in 
any way introducing politics.
3. I see nothing in his words which makes a value judgement about anybody.
I see a censoriousness in your comments which is worrying. Just recently you 
said, 'Guns have no place in a civilised society', which was certainly a value 
judgement, specifically about John Pfersich. Please stop.

Peter Kenny

-Original Message-
From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Sven Van 
Caekenberghe
Sent: 20 September 2019 10:11
To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

> On 20 Sep 2019, at 06:17, john pfersich  wrote:
> 
> I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 

You are violating the implicit rules of engagement in this mailing list: you 
are going off topic, you are using this platform to talk about politics and you 
are giving value judgements about others. Please stop.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 20 Sep 2019, at 06:17, john pfersich  wrote:
> 
> I have no interest in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 

You are violating the implicit rules of engagement in this mailing list: you 
are going off topic, you are using this platform to talk about politics and you 
are giving value judgements about others. Please stop.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Cédrick Béler

Before this thread CoC was actually Clash of Clans for me, it turns out there 
could be some connections ^_^.

I learned a lot reading this thread and this is really interesting in 
understanding how communities work (how collaboration works). 
I will talk to student about that in a lecture we do about Open Source so 
thanks !

Still this is a highly touchy topic especially in this period where the world 
seems… fragile. This seems nevertheless important to have… Ben proposed a 
version that seems « lighter ». I think we need to KISS on that topic so that 
the 0.01% percent problem that it adresses doesn’t have any bad side effect as 
refraining people from being part of the community (at least 2 in the thread).

My 2 cents (going to follow the discussion on GitHub),

Cédrick

> Le 20 sept. 2019 à 10:01, Esteban Lorenzano  a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
>> On 20 Sep 2019, at 09:55, Torsten Bergmann > > wrote:
>> 
>> A wish from my side: please spend half of your energy you want to spend on 
>> this thread 
>> into fixing bugs or contributing a PR. Thanks!
> 
> +42 :)
> 
>>  
>> Bye
>> T.
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Esteban Lorenzano



> On 20 Sep 2019, at 09:55, Torsten Bergmann  wrote:
> 
> A wish from my side: please spend half of your energy you want to spend on 
> this thread 
> into fixing bugs or contributing a PR. Thanks!

+42 :)

>  
> Bye
> T.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Torsten Bergmann


A wish from my side: please spend half of your energy you want to spend on this thread 
into fixing bugs or contributing a PR. Thanks!

 

Bye

T.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Norbert Hartl

https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4663 


Norbert


> Am 20.09.2019 um 08:51 schrieb Norbert Hartl :
> 
> 
> 
>> Am 20.09.2019 um 06:45 schrieb James Foster > >:
>> 
>> First, my guess is that it was part of the thing they copied and that aspect 
>> might not have gotten as much thought as you’ve given it.
>> 
> That is right. I wondered myself about the last part but did not think about 
> it too much.
> 
>> Second, this is an international organization and maybe the intent (by the 
>> original author(s)) was to extend the reach of the NZ/UK/EU-style laws to 
>> apply to those in jurisdictions with less strict speech codes or where the 
>> legal remedy is impractical. That is, maybe the author(s) don’t feel it is 
>> sufficient to tell someone who is harassed, “We can’t do anything about it. 
>> Hire a NZ lawyer.”
>> 
> It doesn’t matter. We are _not_ an international organization that needs to 
> fit in all participating nations laws. We are a community with plenty of 
> nations participating and we are free to define our own culture. Everyone 
> might have additional restrictions how to interpret „free speech“ but that is 
> duty of the particular individual and the laws in the country he/she lives in.
> 
>> These are speculations on my part and, as a US citizen, I’m partial to our 
>> free speech protections. I’d prefer to have private organizations practice 
>> ostracization rather than have the government put rude people in jail. I say 
>> this, not to start a political discussion, but to point out that some 
>> harassment that would be illegal in NZ might not have a legal remedy if the 
>> actor was a US citizen.
>> 
> This part in the text is vague and you acknowledge just that it welcomes 
> speculation about it. In particular people put a lot of their 
> opinion/believe/… into those speculations and I would like to see that 
> minimized in this community. And I really don’t see a benefit having those.
> 
>> In any case, I found that when I submitted a PR then something happened 
>> pretty quickly. So, I’d suggest that you channel your analysis and concerns 
>> into a proposed improvement.
> 
> It is always good to go pro-active on topics rather than just writing mails 
> and complain. In your case it was more of coincidence. We were discussing 
> that for a longer time and your PR just met our time frame of getting a 
> decision ready.
> 
> I will discuss about removing that last part of the text.
> 
> Norbert
> 
>> 
>> James
>> 
>>> On Sep 19, 2019, at 8:44 PM, Richard O'Keefe >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
>>> 
>>> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
>>> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
>>> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
>>> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
>>> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
>>> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
>>> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
>>> 
>>> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
>>> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
>>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html 
>>> 
>>> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
>>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html 
>>> 
>>> for a definition of harassment.
>>> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
>>> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
>>> 
>>> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano >> > wrote:
>>> Hello, 
>>> 
>>> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
>>> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it 
>>> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our 
>>> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it 
>>> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a 
>>> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
>>> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 
>>> 
>>> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
>>> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because 
>>> as it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put 
>>> them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 
>>> 
>>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
>>> our community, you can see it here: 
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660 
>>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-20 Thread Norbert Hartl



> Am 20.09.2019 um 06:45 schrieb James Foster :
> 
> First, my guess is that it was part of the thing they copied and that aspect 
> might not have gotten as much thought as you’ve given it.
> 
That is right. I wondered myself about the last part but did not think about it 
too much.

> Second, this is an international organization and maybe the intent (by the 
> original author(s)) was to extend the reach of the NZ/UK/EU-style laws to 
> apply to those in jurisdictions with less strict speech codes or where the 
> legal remedy is impractical. That is, maybe the author(s) don’t feel it is 
> sufficient to tell someone who is harassed, “We can’t do anything about it. 
> Hire a NZ lawyer.”
> 
It doesn’t matter. We are _not_ an international organization that needs to fit 
in all participating nations laws. We are a community with plenty of nations 
participating and we are free to define our own culture. Everyone might have 
additional restrictions how to interpret „free speech“ but that is duty of the 
particular individual and the laws in the country he/she lives in.

> These are speculations on my part and, as a US citizen, I’m partial to our 
> free speech protections. I’d prefer to have private organizations practice 
> ostracization rather than have the government put rude people in jail. I say 
> this, not to start a political discussion, but to point out that some 
> harassment that would be illegal in NZ might not have a legal remedy if the 
> actor was a US citizen.
> 
This part in the text is vague and you acknowledge just that it welcomes 
speculation about it. In particular people put a lot of their opinion/believe/… 
into those speculations and I would like to see that minimized in this 
community. And I really don’t see a benefit having those.

> In any case, I found that when I submitted a PR then something happened 
> pretty quickly. So, I’d suggest that you channel your analysis and concerns 
> into a proposed improvement.

It is always good to go pro-active on topics rather than just writing mails and 
complain. In your case it was more of coincidence. We were discussing that for 
a longer time and your PR just met our time frame of getting a decision ready.

I will discuss about removing that last part of the text.

Norbert

> 
> James
> 
>> On Sep 19, 2019, at 8:44 PM, Richard O'Keefe > > wrote:
>> 
>> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
>> 
>> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
>> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
>> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
>> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
>> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
>> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
>> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
>> 
>> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
>> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html 
>> 
>> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html 
>> 
>> for a definition of harassment.
>> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
>> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
>> 
>> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano > > wrote:
>> Hello, 
>> 
>> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
>> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it 
>> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our 
>> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it 
>> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a 
>> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
>> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 
>> 
>> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
>> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
>> it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put 
>> them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 
>> 
>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
>> our community, you can see it here: 
>> 
>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660 
>> 
>> 
>> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
>> discuss it and propose modifications. 
>> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Esteban
>> 
>> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Steve Quezadas

Yeah, I agree, what I say or do outside the Pharo channels is completely my
business. this 'code' has no place here. Hell, Richard Stallman got
deprived out of his LIFE'S WORK over a technical definition of what
constitutes statutory rape, which is silly.

Please remove this nonsense out of the pharo community, it has no place
here.

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 9:45 PM James Foster  wrote:

> First, my guess is that it was part of the thing they copied and that
> aspect might not have gotten as much thought as you’ve given it.
>
> Second, this is an international organization and maybe the intent (by the
> original author(s)) was to extend the reach of the NZ/UK/EU-style laws to
> apply to those in jurisdictions with less strict speech codes or where the
> legal remedy is impractical. That is, maybe the author(s) don’t feel it is
> sufficient to tell someone who is harassed, “We can’t do anything about it.
> Hire a NZ lawyer.”
>
> These are speculations on my part and, as a US citizen, I’m partial to our
> free speech protections. I’d prefer to have private organizations practice
> ostracization rather than have the government put rude people in jail. I
> say this, not to start a political discussion, but to point out that some
> harassment that would be illegal in NZ might not have a legal remedy if the
> actor was a US citizen.
>
> In any case, I found that when I submitted a PR then something happened
> pretty quickly. So, I’d suggest that you channel your analysis and concerns
> into a proposed improvement.
>
> James
>
> On Sep 19, 2019, at 8:44 PM, Richard O'Keefe  wrote:
>
> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
>
> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
>
> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html
> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html
> for a definition of harassment.
> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
>
> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here.
>> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it
>> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our
>> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it
>> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a
>> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover.
>> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case.
>>
>> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code.
>> But sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before
>> because as it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger
>> can to put them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct.
>>
>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can
>> serve our community, you can see it here:
>>
>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>>
>> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still
>> discuss it and propose modifications.
>> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Esteban
>>
>> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of
>> our community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible
>> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was
>> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him,
>> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be
>> sent :)
>>
>>
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman  wrote:
>>
>> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful
>> idiot.
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
>> pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
>>> of abusing CoCs
>>
>>
>> I guess you refer to this one...
>> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
>> pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
>> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant
>> manipulators of people.
>> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.
>>
>> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on
>> github.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread James Foster

First, my guess is that it was part of the thing they copied and that aspect 
might not have gotten as much thought as you’ve given it.

Second, this is an international organization and maybe the intent (by the 
original author(s)) was to extend the reach of the NZ/UK/EU-style laws to apply 
to those in jurisdictions with less strict speech codes or where the legal 
remedy is impractical. That is, maybe the author(s) don’t feel it is sufficient 
to tell someone who is harassed, “We can’t do anything about it. Hire a NZ 
lawyer.”

These are speculations on my part and, as a US citizen, I’m partial to our free 
speech protections. I’d prefer to have private organizations practice 
ostracization rather than have the government put rude people in jail. I say 
this, not to start a political discussion, but to point out that some 
harassment that would be illegal in NZ might not have a legal remedy if the 
actor was a US citizen.

In any case, I found that when I submitted a PR then something happened pretty 
quickly. So, I’d suggest that you channel your analysis and concerns into a 
proposed improvement.

James

> On Sep 19, 2019, at 8:44 PM, Richard O'Keefe  wrote:
> 
> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
> 
> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
> 
> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html 
> 
> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html 
> 
> for a definition of harassment.
> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
> 
> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano  > wrote:
> Hello, 
> 
> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it much 
> because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our community 
> has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it fine until 
> now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a real 
> situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 
> 
> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
> it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put them 
> back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 
> 
> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
> our community, you can see it here: 
> 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660 
> 
> 
> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
> discuss it and propose modifications. 
> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Esteban
> 
> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of our 
> community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible 
> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was 
> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him, 
> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be 
> sent :)
> 
> 
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman > > wrote:
>> 
>> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful 
>> idiot.  
>> 
>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
>> mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
>> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
>> of abusing CoCs
>> 
>> I guess you refer to this one...
>> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
>> > mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
>> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant 
>> > manipulators of people.
>> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.  
>> 
>> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on 
>> github.
>>  
>>  
>> and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
>> people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread James Foster

Before doing that would you be willing to submit a PR with a proposed 
improvement (and a discussion of why)?

> On Sep 19, 2019, at 9:17 PM, john pfersich  wrote:
> 
> And I don’t intend to abide by it. I’ll cancel my Pharo Association 
> contribution and my contribution to Stephane’s Spec book. I have no interest 
> in supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 
> 
> /*—-*/
> Sent from my iPhone
> https://boincstats.com/signature/-1/user/51616339056/sig.png 
> 
> See https://objectnets.net  and 
> https://objectnets.org 
> 
> On Sep 19, 2019, at 20:44, Richard O'Keefe  > wrote:
> 
>> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
>> 
>> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
>> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
>> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
>> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
>> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
>> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
>> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
>> 
>> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
>> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html 
>> 
>> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html 
>> 
>> for a definition of harassment.
>> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
>> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
>> 
>> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano > > wrote:
>> Hello, 
>> 
>> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
>> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it 
>> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our 
>> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it 
>> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a 
>> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
>> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 
>> 
>> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
>> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
>> it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put 
>> them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 
>> 
>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
>> our community, you can see it here: 
>> 
>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660 
>> 
>> 
>> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
>> discuss it and propose modifications. 
>> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Esteban
>> 
>> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of our 
>> community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible 
>> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was 
>> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him, 
>> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be 
>> sent :)
>> 
>> 
>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful 
>>> idiot.  
>>> 
>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
>>> mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
>>> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
>>> of abusing CoCs
>>> 
>>> I guess you refer to this one...
>>> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
>>> > mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
>>> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant 
>>> > manipulators of people.
>>> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.  
>>> 
>>> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on 
>>> github.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
>>> people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from 
>>> 
>>> Note, the board member who blocked your GIthub account and deleted your 
>>> post there
>>> also voiced their opinion as being...
>>> For me a "welcome and be nice" should be enough to just continue as 
>>> before. 
>>> I find the introduction of CoC was a noise we didn't need, 
>>> our community was doing well and

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread john pfersich

And I don’t intend to abide by it. I’ll cancel my Pharo Association 
contribution and my contribution to Stephane’s Spec book. I have no interest in 
supporting a left-wing snowflake “Code of Conduct”. 

/*—-*/
Sent from my iPhone
https://boincstats.com/signature/-1/user/51616339056/sig.png
See https://objectnets.net and https://objectnets.org

> On Sep 19, 2019, at 20:44, Richard O'Keefe  wrote:
> 
> On the whole, the new code is pretty good.
> 
> There was one thing that troubled me, though:
> "even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
> What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
> other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
> to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
> I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
> in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.
> 
> My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html
> which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html
> for a definition of harassment.
> If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
> I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.
> 
> So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.
> 
> 
>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano  wrote:
>> Hello, 
>> 
>> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
>> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it 
>> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our 
>> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it 
>> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a 
>> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
>> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 
>> 
>> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
>> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
>> it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put 
>> them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 
>> 
>> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve 
>> our community, you can see it here: 
>> 
>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>> 
>> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
>> discuss it and propose modifications. 
>> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Esteban
>> 
>> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of our 
>> community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible 
>> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was 
>> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him, 
>> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be 
>> sent :)
>> 
>> 
>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman  wrote:
>>> 
>>> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful 
>>> idiot.  
>>> 
 On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
  wrote:
 Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
 of abusing CoCs
>>> 
>>> I guess you refer to this one...
>>> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
>>> >  wrote:
>>> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant 
>>> > manipulators of people.
>>> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.  
>>> 
>>> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on 
>>> github.
>>>  
>>>  
 and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
 people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from 
>>> 
>>> Note, the board member who blocked your GIthub account and deleted your 
>>> post there
>>> also voiced their opinion as being...
>>> For me a "welcome and be nice" should be enough to just continue as 
>>> before. 
>>> I find the introduction of CoC was a noise we didn't need, 
>>> our community was doing well and self-regulated without problem until 
>>> now.
>>> 
>>> So in spite of your implication, I doubt there is anything sinister from 
>>> the CoC in play here.
>>> Comments such as  "makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian 
>>> sociopath, or a useful idiot."
>>> have been consistently condemned years before thought of a CoC.
>>> 
>>>  
 I'm getting called a troll and a nobody in public by members of the 
 project, 
>>> 
>>> Its not that you are a "nobody", but actually you were "unknown to us" two 
>>> days ago.
>>> Maybe you don't know Serge, but we've know him for years and his good work 
>>> including governance of our GSoC participation
>>> so please consider why such

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Richard O'Keefe

On the whole, the new code is pretty good.

There was one thing that troubled me, though:
"even outside of Pharo's public communication channels."
What business is it of the Pharo Board what anyone says in any
other community?  I've heard too many cases where A says something
to B and C complains about it as harassment when B didn't mind.
I have personally known people *affectionately* address each other
in terms that most would consider a deadly insult.

My behaviour in all digital media is subject to the
Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.  See
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html
which extends the Harassment Act 1997.  See
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html
for a definition of harassment.
If I harass anyone according to these Acts, they have a legal remedy.
I understand the the UK and the EU have similar laws.

So I don't understand why the Pharo Board want to extend their reach.


On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 07:21, Esteban Lorenzano  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here.
> As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it
> much because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our
> community has been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it
> fine until now. Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a
> real situation as the ones the CoC tries to cover.
> So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case.
>
> Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But
> sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because
> as it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put
> them back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct.
>
> So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can
> serve our community, you can see it here:
>
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660
>
> This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still
> discuss it and propose modifications.
> Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)
>
> Cheers,
> Esteban
>
> PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of
> our community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible
> project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was
> just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him,
> but that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be
> sent :)
>
>
> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman  wrote:
>
> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful
> idiot.
>
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
> pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
>
>> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
>> of abusing CoCs
>
>
> I guess you refer to this one...
> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
> pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant
> manipulators of people.
> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.
>
> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on
> github.
>
>
>
>> and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
>> people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from
>>
>
> Note, the board member who blocked your GIthub account and deleted your
> post there
> also voiced their opinion as being...
> For me a "welcome and be nice" should be enough to just continue as
> before.
> I find the introduction of CoC was a noise we didn't need,
> our community was doing well and self-regulated without problem until
> now.
>
> So in spite of your implication, I doubt there is anything sinister from
> the CoC in play here.
> Comments such as  "makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian
> sociopath, or a useful idiot."
> have been consistently condemned years before thought of a CoC.
>
>
>
>> I'm getting called a troll and a nobody in public by members of the
>> project,
>
>
> Its not that you are a "nobody", but actually you were "unknown to us" two
> days ago.
> Maybe you don't know Serge, but we've know him for years and his good work
> including governance of our GSoC participation
> so please consider why such comments from a newcomer may be dealt with as
> a troll.
> Community standards do not maintain themselves: They're maintained by
> people actively applying them, visibly, in public.
>
> Now personally I'm not going to condemn you on one slip.
> I've been told to pull my head in before and they were right - I was
> venting after a bad day at work.  But no one held it against me long.
> These nontechnical and emotion-charge debates are infrequent and I hope
> get a chance to see how things normally run once we are past it.
>
> cheers -ben
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Hello, 

I’m talking on behalf of the Pharo Board here. 
As start, we accepted Serge’s proposition without actually discussing it much 
because we didn’t think it was going to be really a problem. Our community has 
been self-regulating since the beginning and we were doing it fine until now. 
Once or twice we (the board) needed to act, but never had a real situation as 
the ones the CoC tries to cover. 
So, we can say we opened the umbrella without rain, just in case. 

Now, after observe the situation, we have decided to retract the code. But 
sadly, we cannot just remove it and let things continue as before because as 
it’s know “it you open a can or worms, you will need a bigger can to put them 
back in”. Which means now we need a code of conduct. 

So we are going to take the simplest one we could find that still can serve our 
community, you can see it here: 

https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4660 

This PR will be accepted, but as anything in our community, you can still 
discuss it and propose modifications. 
Just remember be respectful of people disagreeing with your ideas :)

Cheers,
Esteban

PS: As personal note: I blocked a github user that insulted a member of our 
community, a user who did not had history with us (or any other visible 
project), who did not had a name or ways to contact him so I assumed it was 
just another troll. Now, he identifies himself here... I will unblock him, but 
that does not means the kind of disrespectful messages he sent can be sent :)

> On 19 Sep 2019, at 19:47, Ben Coman  wrote:
> 
> makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful 
> idiot.  
> 
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
> mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
> of abusing CoCs
> 
> I guess you refer to this one...
> > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users 
> > mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> wrote:
> > I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant manipulators 
> > of people.
> > All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.  
> 
> Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on 
> github.
>  
>  
> and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
> people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from 
> 
> Note, the board member who blocked your GIthub account and deleted your post 
> there
> also voiced their opinion as being...
> For me a "welcome and be nice" should be enough to just continue as 
> before. 
> I find the introduction of CoC was a noise we didn't need, 
> our community was doing well and self-regulated without problem until now.
> 
> So in spite of your implication, I doubt there is anything sinister from the 
> CoC in play here.
> Comments such as  "makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian 
> sociopath, or a useful idiot."
> have been consistently condemned years before thought of a CoC.
> 
>  
> I'm getting called a troll and a nobody in public by members of the project, 
> 
> Its not that you are a "nobody", but actually you were "unknown to us" two 
> days ago.
> Maybe you don't know Serge, but we've know him for years and his good work 
> including governance of our GSoC participation
> so please consider why such comments from a newcomer may be dealt with as a 
> troll. 
> Community standards do not maintain themselves: They're maintained by people 
> actively applying them, visibly, in public.
> 
> Now personally I'm not going to condemn you on one slip.  
> I've been told to pull my head in before and they were right - I was venting 
> after a bad day at work.  But no one held it against me long.
> These nontechnical and emotion-charge debates are infrequent and I hope get a 
> chance to see how things normally run once we are past it.
> 
> cheers -ben

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Ben Coman

makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian sociopath, or a useful
idiot.

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 23:07, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:

> Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
> of abusing CoCs

I guess you refer to this one...
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 19:39, Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
> I agree. Technical people are too easy to exploit by malignant
manipulators of people.
> All too often they don't even realize it after the fact.

Thats fairly benign and doubt it had anything to do with being blocked on
github.

> and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
> people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from
>

Note, the board member who blocked your GIthub account and deleted your
post there
also voiced their opinion as being...
For me a "welcome and be nice" should be enough to just continue as
before.
I find the introduction of CoC was a noise we didn't need,
our community was doing well and self-regulated without problem until
now.

So in spite of your implication, I doubt there is anything sinister from
the CoC in play here.
Comments such as  "makes me wonder whether he's such a machiavellian
sociopath, or a useful idiot."
have been consistently condemned years before thought of a CoC.

> I'm getting called a troll and a nobody in public by members of the
> project,

Its not that you are a "nobody", but actually you were "unknown to us" two
days ago.
Maybe you don't know Serge, but we've know him for years and his good work
including governance of our GSoC participation
so please consider why such comments from a newcomer may be dealt with as a
troll.
Community standards do not maintain themselves: They're maintained by
people actively applying them, visibly, in public.

Now personally I'm not going to condemn you on one slip.
I've been told to pull my head in before and they were right - I was
venting after a bad day at work.  But no one held it against me long.
These nontechnical and emotion-charge debates are infrequent and I hope get
a chance to see how things normally run once we are past it.

cheers -ben

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users

--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:35:51AM -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna C??rdenas wrote:
> The post was deleted not because of the CoC, but because of an

Allright, but this is what GitHub told me 3 hours ago:

A maintainer of the @pharo-project organization has blocked you because of this 
content. 
For more information please see the code of conduct. 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

You might want to clarify that the CoC is not yet in force, 
since GitHub thinks it is.

> unrespectful treatment of one of the members of the community, as the
> conversation here shows. And in fact what this probe that we care as a
> community for the well being of the community and its members, specially
> when complex matters are addressed, and not only for commits or some
> future possible porting and that such promises or technical prowess
> don't entitled anyone to insult others.

--- End Message ---

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

The post was deleted not because of the CoC, but because of an
unrespectful treatment of one of the members of the community, as the
conversation here shows. And in fact what this probe that we care as a
community for the well being of the community and its members, specially
when complex matters are addressed, and not only for commits or some
future possible porting and that such promises or technical prowess
don't entitled anyone to insult others.

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 10:06 a. m., Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users wrote:

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Eugen Leitl via Pharo-users

--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 08:25:47AM -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna C??rdenas wrote:

> I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not
> on this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has

Let's see, I've posted one email to this list describing the dangers
of abusing CoCs and one post to GitHub describing the motivations of
people who introduce CoCs, and immediately get banned on GitHub from 
Pharo citing this very CoC (which is apparently now already in force, 
and is already controlling the discussion of this particular CoC, am 
I allowed to call this stalinist or kafkaeske, or is this already 
covered by the blanket ban?).

I'm getting called a troll and a nobody in public by members of the project, 
incidentally thus violating the CoC twice, which is, of course, 
allowed by the liberal interpretation of what and who is considered abusive.

Thank you for instantly proving my points far better than I ever could. 

> been deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see
> is addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name
> and seemed to create the account just to insult and you can see by

I've resuscitated that GitHub account a couple years ago for work uses.
It will never see content published there since Microsoft purchased 
GitHub last year.

I've joined the pharo-users@ list a few days ago since I'm looking into
porting to Pharo OpenCroquet/OpenCobalt project which is being currently
resuscitated on Squeak. I commented on the CoC issue since I consider
project governance and their failures as very important. 

> his/her empty account without any info and any contributions[2].
> 
> [1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478
> [2] https://github.com/eleitl
> 
> So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at
> [2] and Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because
> of it, so the "you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the
> plural one. Because conversation has been split in two places, these
> mistakes can be done. I think that you raised a valid concern in a
> civilized manner, are a recognized member of the community and did not

I'm sorry, I don't seem to find a "recognized" anywhere in the CoC
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

Is this something you're going to include in later revisions of it, or is
this up to interpretation?

> insulted Serge, so the comments were not addressing you.
> 
> This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so
> far have shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the
> conversation and be respectful with the participants, the better.

Let's see, my porting project is dead, but you've got an elevated 
conversation, and can be all respectful towards each other. 
One has to have priorities. 

All the best of luck to the Pharo community. You're going to need it.

> Cheers,
> 
> Offray

--- End Message ---

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Well , if I was too touchy, I’m sorry. I accept the clarification. However, I 
am still no clearer about the Code of Conduct. It is still there on Github. Is 
it in effect as the official Code for the Pharo community, or is it not? My 
request in my first post today was for someone, on behalf of the board, to tell 
us.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Esteban 
Lorenzano
Sent: 19 September 2019 14:49
To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

Offray is right.

And no, I was not referring to you but in general :)

 

Esteban





On 19 Sep 2019, at 15:32, PBKResearch mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk> > wrote:

 

Offray

 

You may be right, though I don’t think so. But ‘You have been warned’ was aimed 
at me; I’m sure of that.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> > On Behalf Of Offray Vladimir 
Luna Cárdenas
Sent: 19 September 2019 14:26
To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

Peter,

I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not on 
this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has been 
deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see is 
addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name and seemed 
to create the account just to insult and you can see by his/her empty account 
without any info and any contributions[2].

[1]  <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478
[2]  <https://github.com/eleitl> https://github.com/eleitl

So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at [2] and 
Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because of it, so the 
"you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the plural one. Because 
conversation has been split in two places, these mistakes can be done. I think 
that you raised a valid concern in a civilized manner, are a recognized member 
of the community and did not insulted Serge, so the comments were not 
addressing you.

This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so far have 
shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the conversation and be 
respectful with the participants, the better.

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 8:02 a. m., PBKResearch wrote:

I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories, not 
anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or just a 
troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the trading name I 
used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual name is Peter Kenny, 
and I use it to sign everything I post in this forum. I have no repositories, 
because the only code I write is of no general interest. As a member of the 
community, I was invited by Stephane Ducasse to work up a post I had written to 
help someone into a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that is still available 
in Pharo publications. So I am not a troll; I am an elderly but still active 
user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. There is an English saying 
about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might consider before making 
personal attacks on me.

 

I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked whether he 
acted with authority when he posted the code, because I genuinely don’t know 
what official position he has in the Pharo world. I still don’t know whether 
the code is in effect as a result of being posted.

 

‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being threatened. If 
comments here, which are relevant to the topic and expressed in moderate 
language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent myself without waiting to be 
banned.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> 
 On Behalf Of Esteban Lorenzano
Sent: 19 September 2019 12:49
To: Any question about pharo is welcome  <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> 

Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

 







On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch < <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk> 
pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk> wrote:

 

I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
unclear situation. The github entry at  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. 

 

Yes it can be closed. 

As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of th

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Ben Coman

>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 15:32, PBKResearch  wrote
>> You may be right, though I don’t think so. But ‘You have been warned’
was aimed at me; I’m sure of that.
>
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 21:50, Esteban Lorenzano 
wrote:
>
> Offray is right.
> And no, I was not referring to you but in general :)
>

Misinterpretation is a risk of a low-bandwidth communication channel like
email and demonstrates
the risk of a CoC being weighted towards first strike punitive action.

I do think having a CoC is useful to provide a baseline (and also in
today's world not having one can be a troublesome vacuum).
I like GoLang's adaption (https://golang.org/conduct) with the priority of
goals spelled out in the "About" introduction,
and the way it replaces the "Enforcement" section by "Conflict Resolution"

The Linux CoC sidebar has some good points (
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.html#code-of-conduct-interpretation
)

Maybe our CoC could be as simple as... (https://dart.dev/code-of-conduct)

cheers -ben

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Offray is right.
And no, I was not referring to you but in general :)

Esteban

> On 19 Sep 2019, at 15:32, PBKResearch  wrote:
> 
> Offray
>  
> You may be right, though I don’t think so. But ‘You have been warned’ was 
> aimed at me; I’m sure of that.
>  
> Peter Kenny
>  
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Offray 
> Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> Sent: 19 September 2019 14:26
> To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
>  
> Peter,
> I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not on 
> this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has been 
> deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see is 
> addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name and seemed 
> to create the account just to insult and you can see by his/her empty account 
> without any info and any contributions[2].
> 
> [1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478 
> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478>
> [2] https://github.com/eleitl <https://github.com/eleitl>
> So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at [2] 
> and Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because of it, 
> so the "you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the plural one. 
> Because conversation has been split in two places, these mistakes can be 
> done. I think that you raised a valid concern in a civilized manner, are a 
> recognized member of the community and did not insulted Serge, so the 
> comments were not addressing you.
> This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so far 
> have shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the conversation and 
> be respectful with the participants, the better.
> Cheers,
> Offray
> On 19/09/19 8:02 a. m., PBKResearch wrote:
>> I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories, not 
>> anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or just a 
>> troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the trading name I 
>> used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual name is Peter Kenny, 
>> and I use it to sign everything I post in this forum. I have no 
>> repositories, because the only code I write is of no general interest. As a 
>> member of the community, I was invited by Stephane Ducasse to work up a post 
>> I had written to help someone into a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that 
>> is still available in Pharo publications. So I am not a troll; I am an 
>> elderly but still active user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. 
>> There is an English saying about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might 
>> consider before making personal attacks on me.
>>  
>> I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked whether he 
>> acted with authority when he posted the code, because I genuinely don’t know 
>> what official position he has in the Pharo world. I still don’t know whether 
>> the code is in effect as a result of being posted.
>>  
>> ‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being threatened. 
>> If comments here, which are relevant to the topic and expressed in moderate 
>> language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent myself without waiting to be 
>> banned.
>>  
>> Peter Kenny
>>  
>> From: Pharo-users  
>> <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> On Behalf Of Esteban Lorenzano
>> Sent: 19 September 2019 12:49
>> To: Any question about pharo is welcome  
>> <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch >> <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>> wrote:
>>>  
>>> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the 
>>> present unclear situation. The github entry at 
>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md 
>>> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> 
>>> is still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 
>>> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> was abruptly closed by 
>>> Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. 
>>  
>> Yes it can be closed. 
>> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the 
>> members of the community. 
&

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread Esteban Maringolo

Peter,

I also understand that Esteban Lorenzano didn't aim the comment at
you, and there was a language mismatch in the tone or intention of the
last sentence.

Let's get back to the discussion of the CoC (if something else must be
discussed) and avoid the "you said"/"he said" kind of side-debate that
makes us lose focus.

Regards,

Regards,

Esteban A. Maringolo

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:33 AM PBKResearch  wrote:
>
> Offray
>
>
>
> You may be right, though I don’t think so. But ‘You have been warned’ was 
> aimed at me; I’m sure of that.
>
>
>
> Peter Kenny
>
>
>
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Offray 
> Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> Sent: 19 September 2019 14:26
> To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
>
>
>
> Peter,
>
> I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not on 
> this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has been 
> deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see is 
> addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name and seemed 
> to create the account just to insult and you can see by his/her empty account 
> without any info and any contributions[2].
>
> [1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478
> [2] https://github.com/eleitl
>
> So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at [2] 
> and Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because of it, 
> so the "you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the plural one. 
> Because conversation has been split in two places, these mistakes can be 
> done. I think that you raised a valid concern in a civilized manner, are a 
> recognized member of the community and did not insulted Serge, so the 
> comments were not addressing you.
>
> This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so far 
> have shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the conversation and 
> be respectful with the participants, the better.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
> On 19/09/19 8:02 a. m., PBKResearch wrote:
>
> I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories, not 
> anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or just a 
> troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the trading name I 
> used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual name is Peter Kenny, 
> and I use it to sign everything I post in this forum. I have no repositories, 
> because the only code I write is of no general interest. As a member of the 
> community, I was invited by Stephane Ducasse to work up a post I had written 
> to help someone into a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that is still 
> available in Pharo publications. So I am not a troll; I am an elderly but 
> still active user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. There is an 
> English saying about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might consider 
> before making personal attacks on me.
>
>
>
> I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked whether he 
> acted with authority when he posted the code, because I genuinely don’t know 
> what official position he has in the Pharo world. I still don’t know whether 
> the code is in effect as a result of being posted.
>
>
>
> ‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being threatened. 
> If comments here, which are relevant to the topic and expressed in moderate 
> language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent myself without waiting to be 
> banned.
>
>
>
> Peter Kenny
>
>
>
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Esteban 
> Lorenzano
> Sent: 19 September 2019 12:49
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch  wrote:
>
>
>
> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
> unclear situation. The github entry at 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
> still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
> Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich.
>
>
>
> Yes it can be closed.
>
> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the members 
> of the community.
>
> Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by someone 
> that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you think is a 
> real member of the community or just a troll.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Offray

 

You may be right, though I don’t think so. But ‘You have been warned’ was aimed 
at me; I’m sure of that.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Offray 
Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
Sent: 19 September 2019 14:26
To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

Peter,

I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not on 
this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has been 
deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see is 
addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name and seemed 
to create the account just to insult and you can see by his/her empty account 
without any info and any contributions[2].

[1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478
[2] https://github.com/eleitl

So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at [2] and 
Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because of it, so the 
"you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the plural one. Because 
conversation has been split in two places, these mistakes can be done. I think 
that you raised a valid concern in a civilized manner, are a recognized member 
of the community and did not insulted Serge, so the comments were not 
addressing you.

This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so far have 
shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the conversation and be 
respectful with the participants, the better.

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 8:02 a. m., PBKResearch wrote:

I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories, not 
anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or just a 
troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the trading name I 
used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual name is Peter Kenny, 
and I use it to sign everything I post in this forum. I have no repositories, 
because the only code I write is of no general interest. As a member of the 
community, I was invited by Stephane Ducasse to work up a post I had written to 
help someone into a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that is still available 
in Pharo publications. So I am not a troll; I am an elderly but still active 
user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. There is an English saying 
about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might consider before making 
personal attacks on me.

 

I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked whether he 
acted with authority when he posted the code, because I genuinely don’t know 
what official position he has in the Pharo world. I still don’t know whether 
the code is in effect as a result of being posted.

 

‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being threatened. If 
comments here, which are relevant to the topic and expressed in moderate 
language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent myself without waiting to be 
banned.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> 
 On Behalf Of Esteban Lorenzano
Sent: 19 September 2019 12:49
To: Any question about pharo is welcome  <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> 

Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

 






On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk> > wrote:

 

I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
unclear situation. The github entry at  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. 

 

Yes it can be closed. 

As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the members 
of the community. 

Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by someone 
that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you think is a real 
member of the community or just a troll.

 

Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But emitting 
opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is a no-go. 

 

So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 

But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses things in a 
civilised way.

 

So you have been warned :)

 

Esteban

 

PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to make 
Pharo a great development environment. 

And we are all here because we all pursue that.

 We create a software that is open source and wants to have some social value 
added.

 

This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.

 

We now know that Serge posted the Code wit

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Peter,

I think that the comment was referred to the comment made on the PR (not
on this list) that was insulting Serge (which I will not repeat). It has
been deleted now and only Stephan's response remains[1]. As you can see
is addressing someone different, who has no contributions and no name
and seemed to create the account just to insult and you can see by
his/her empty account without any info and any contributions[2].

[1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637#issuecomment-532815478
[2] https://github.com/eleitl

So, in my interpretation, Stephan's comment was referred to the user at
[2] and Esteban warning was referred to the closing of the issue because
of it, so the "you" in the warning was not the singular "you", but the
plural one. Because conversation has been split in two places, these
mistakes can be done. I think that you raised a valid concern in a
civilized manner, are a recognized member of the community and did not
insulted Serge, so the comments were not addressing you.

This can be a very sensible approach, as the discussion on the list so
far have shown, so the more clarity we can have to elevate the
conversation and be respectful with the participants, the better.

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 8:02 a. m., PBKResearch wrote:
>
> I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories,
> not anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or
> just a troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the
> trading name I used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual
> name is Peter Kenny, and I use it to sign everything I post in this
> forum. I have no repositories, because the only code I write is of no
> general interest. As a member of the community, I was invited by
> Stephane Ducasse to work up a post I had written to help someone into
> a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that is still available in Pharo
> publications. So I am not a troll; I am an elderly but still active
> user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. There is an English
> saying about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might consider
> before making personal attacks on me.
>
>  
>
> I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked
> whether he acted with authority when he posted the code, because I
> genuinely don’t know what official position he has in the Pharo world.
> I still don’t know whether the code is in effect as a result of being
> posted.
>
>  
>
> ‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being
> threatened. If comments here, which are relevant to the topic and
> expressed in moderate language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent
> myself without waiting to be banned.
>
>  
>
> Peter Kenny
>
>  
>
> *From:*Pharo-users  *On Behalf Of
> *Esteban Lorenzano
> *Sent:* 19 September 2019 12:49
> *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome 
> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch  <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>  
>
> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in
> the present unclear situation. The github entry
> at 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is
> still there, and has been there since last May. The github
> discussion on https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was
> abruptly closed by Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate
> comments about Serge Stinckwich.
>
>  
>
> Yes it can be closed. 
>
> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the
> members of the community. 
>
> Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by
> someone that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you
> think is a real member of the community or just a troll.
>
>  
>
> Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But
> emitting opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is
> a no-go. 
>
>  
>
> So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 
>
> But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses
> things in a civilised way.
>
>  
>
> So you have been warned :)
>
>  
>
> Esteban
>
>  
>
> PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to
> make Pharo a great development environment. 
>
> And we are all here because we all pursue that.
>
>  We create a software that is open source and wants to have some
> social value added.
>
>  
>
> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>
>  
>
> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior dis

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

I think the comments about “someone that has no name, no repositories, not 
anything that makes you think is a real member of the community or just a 
troll” are directed at me. My e-mail address is based on the trading name I 
used at the time I was doing consulting work; my actual name is Peter Kenny, 
and I use it to sign everything I post in this forum. I have no repositories, 
because the only code I write is of no general interest. As a member of the 
community, I was invited by Stephane Ducasse to work up a post I had written to 
help someone into a pamphlet on web scraping; I think that is still available 
in Pharo publications. So I am not a troll; I am an elderly but still active 
user of Pharo, and concerned about developments. There is an English saying 
about pots and kettles, which Mr Lorenzano might consider before making 
personal attacks on me.

 

I did not say anything insulting about Serge Stinckwich. I asked whether he 
acted with authority when he posted the code, because I genuinely don’t know 
what official position he has in the Pharo world. I still don’t know whether 
the code is in effect as a result of being posted.

 

‘You have been warned’ seems like a threat. I do not like being threatened. If 
comments here, which are relevant to the topic and expressed in moderate 
language, are no longer welcome, I shall absent myself without waiting to be 
banned.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Esteban 
Lorenzano
Sent: 19 September 2019 12:49
To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

 





On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk> > wrote:

 

I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
unclear situation. The github entry at  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on  
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. 

 

Yes it can be closed. 

As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the members 
of the community. 

Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by someone 
that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you think is a real 
member of the community or just a troll.

 

Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But emitting 
opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is a no-go. 

 

So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 

But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses things in a 
civilised way.

 

So you have been warned :)

 

Esteban

 

PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to make 
Pharo a great development environment. 

And we are all here because we all pursue that.

 We create a software that is open source and wants to have some social value 
added.

 

This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.

 

We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with the board. 
Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo community? Does the 
fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted by the community – not just 
for this mailing list, but for all Pharo activities? If Serge did not have 
authority, shouldn’t it just be removed, at least until the board have 
discussed it?

 

The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we need a code 
of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now been closed. Does that 
mean that James’s proposal has been rejected? If so, why?

 

If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly accepting 
that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly accepting how it got 
there. What is necessary is for the board collectively, or someone representing 
the board, to tell us what the situation is and what is going to happen next – 
preferably with justifications.

 

Peter Kenny 

 

From: Pharo-users < <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> 
pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> On Behalf Of Steve Quezadas
Sent: 19 September 2019 03:35
To: Any question about pharo is welcome < <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> 
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct

 

Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this maillist is 
that its very community oriented and everyone here helps each other. It's 
devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I would find on, say, 
facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that platform anymore. 

 

And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people and make fun 
of them or whatever, Like most people on this list

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Thanks Esteban. I'm more hopeful about where community conversation can
take us... let's give it time.

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 7:43 a. m., Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
> I reopened while reporting the abuser (and block him). 
>
> But frankly, I do not think the discussion will end in anything useful
> (here or there).
>
> Esteban
>
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 14:38, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>> mailto:offray.l...@mutabit.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I really liked the way the conversation was advancing on the PR
>> before it was used to insult one of the members of the community. I
>> don't know if closing the whole thread on the PR is only the way to
>> keep the trolls out of it, because it also keeps everyone who is
>> trying to make a good contribution from civilized conversation. There
>> is another way on GitHub to only keep trolls out while making the
>> conversation available for the ones willing to build from it?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Offray
>>
>> On 19/09/19 6:49 a. m., Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch >>> <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in
>>>> the present unclear situation. The github entry
>>>> at https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md 
>>>> is
>>>> still there, and has been there since last May. The github
>>>> discussion on https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was
>>>> abruptly closed by Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate
>>>> comments about Serge Stinckwich.
>>>
>>> Yes it can be closed. 
>>> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of
>>> the members of the community. 
>>> Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked
>>> by someone that has no name, no repositories, not anything that
>>> makes you think is a real member of the community or just a troll.
>>>
>>> Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But
>>> emitting opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did
>>> is a no-go. 
>>>
>>> So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 
>>> But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses
>>> things in a civilised way.
>>>
>>> So you have been warned :)
>>>
>>> Esteban
>>>
>>> PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is
>>> to make Pharo a great development environment. 
>>> And we are all here because we all pursue that.
>>>  We create a software that is open source and wants to have some
>>> social value added.
>>>
>>>> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>>>>  
>>>> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion
>>>> with the board. Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the
>>>> Pharo community? Does the fact that he did so mean it is officially
>>>> adopted by the community – not just for this mailing list, but for
>>>> all Pharo activities? If Serge did not have authority, shouldn’t it
>>>> just be removed, at least until the board have discussed it?
>>>>  
>>>> The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we
>>>> need a code of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now
>>>> been closed. Does that mean that James’s proposal has been
>>>> rejected? If so, why?
>>>>  
>>>> If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly
>>>> accepting that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly
>>>> accepting how it got there. What is necessary is for the board
>>>> collectively, or someone representing the board, to tell us what
>>>> the situation is and what is going to happen next – preferably with
>>>> justifications.
>>>>  
>>>> Peter Kenny 
>>>>  
>>>> *From:* Pharo-users >>> <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org>> *On Behalf Of *Steve
>>>> Quezadas
>>>> *Sent:* 19 September 2019 03:35
>>>> *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome
>>>> mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct
>>>>  
>>>> Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

I reopened while reporting the abuser (and block him). 

But frankly, I do not think the discussion will end in anything useful (here or 
there).

Esteban

> On 19 Sep 2019, at 14:38, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I really liked the way the conversation was advancing on the PR before it was 
> used to insult one of the members of the community. I don't know if closing 
> the whole thread on the PR is only the way to keep the trolls out of it, 
> because it also keeps everyone who is trying to make a good contribution from 
> civilized conversation. There is another way on GitHub to only keep trolls 
> out while making the conversation available for the ones willing to build 
> from it?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Offray
> 
> On 19/09/19 6:49 a. m., Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch >> <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the 
>>> present unclear situation. The github entry at 
>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md 
>>> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> 
>>> is still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 
>>> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> was abruptly closed by 
>>> Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich.
>> 
>> Yes it can be closed. 
>> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the 
>> members of the community. 
>> Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by 
>> someone that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you think 
>> is a real member of the community or just a troll.
>> 
>> Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But emitting 
>> opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is a no-go. 
>> 
>> So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 
>> But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses things in 
>> a civilised way.
>> 
>> So you have been warned :)
>> 
>> Esteban
>> 
>> PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to make 
>> Pharo a great development environment. 
>> And we are all here because we all pursue that.
>>  We create a software that is open source and wants to have some social 
>> value added.
>> 
>>> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>>>  
>>> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with the 
>>> board. Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo community? 
>>> Does the fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted by the community 
>>> – not just for this mailing list, but for all Pharo activities? If Serge 
>>> did not have authority, shouldn’t it just be removed, at least until the 
>>> board have discussed it?
>>>  
>>> The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we need a 
>>> code of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now been closed. 
>>> Does that mean that James’s proposal has been rejected? If so, why?
>>>  
>>> If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly accepting 
>>> that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly accepting how it got 
>>> there. What is necessary is for the board collectively, or someone 
>>> representing the board, to tell us what the situation is and what is going 
>>> to happen next – preferably with justifications.
>>>  
>>> Peter Kenny 
>>>  
>>> From: Pharo-users >> <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org>> On Behalf Of Steve Quezadas
>>> Sent: 19 September 2019 03:35
>>> To: Any question about pharo is welcome >> <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct
>>>  
>>> Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this maillist 
>>> is that its very community oriented and everyone here helps each other. 
>>> It's devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I would find on, 
>>> say, facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that platform anymore. 
>>>  
>>> And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people and make 
>>> fun of them or whatever, Like most people on this list doesn't already know 
>&g

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Hi,

I really liked the way the conversation was advancing on the PR before
it was used to insult one of the members of the community. I don't know
if closing the whole thread on the PR is only the way to keep the trolls
out of it, because it also keeps everyone who is trying to make a good
contribution from civilized conversation. There is another way on GitHub
to only keep trolls out while making the conversation available for the
ones willing to build from it?

Cheers,

Offray

On 19/09/19 6:49 a. m., Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
>
>
>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch > <mailto:pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>> wrote:
>>
>> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the
>> present unclear situation. The github entry
>> at https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is
>> still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion
>> on https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly
>> closed by Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about
>> Serge Stinckwich.
>
> Yes it can be closed. 
> As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the
> members of the community. 
> Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by
> someone that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you
> think is a real member of the community or just a troll.
>
> Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But
> emitting opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is
> a no-go. 
>
> So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 
> But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses
> things in a civilised way.
>
> So you have been warned :)
>
> Esteban
>
> PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to
> make Pharo a great development environment. 
> And we are all here because we all pursue that.
>  We create a software that is open source and wants to have some
> social value added.
>
>> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>>  
>> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with
>> the board. Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo
>> community? Does the fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted
>> by the community – not just for this mailing list, but for all Pharo
>> activities? If Serge did not have authority, shouldn’t it just be
>> removed, at least until the board have discussed it?
>>  
>> The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we
>> need a code of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now
>> been closed. Does that mean that James’s proposal has been rejected?
>> If so, why?
>>  
>> If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly
>> accepting that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly
>> accepting how it got there. What is necessary is for the board
>> collectively, or someone representing the board, to tell us what the
>> situation is and what is going to happen next – preferably with
>> justifications.
>>  
>> Peter Kenny 
>>  
>> *From:* Pharo-users > <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org>> *On Behalf Of *Steve
>> Quezadas
>> *Sent:* 19 September 2019 03:35
>> *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome
>> mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct
>>  
>> Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this
>> maillist is that its very community oriented and everyone here helps
>> each other. It's devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I
>> would find on, say, facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that
>> platform anymore. 
>>  
>> And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people
>> and make fun of them or whatever, Like most people on this list
>> doesn't already know that. Im very vocal about certain political and
>> social opinions, am not ashamed about my opinions, am open about it,
>> is currently "unpopular" but don't discuss them here because it's
>> offtopic and I don't want to piss off people in any event. I don't
>> want it turning into another facebook basically. 
>>  
>> I think we should all close this conversation, it's offtopic and not
>> relevant to any problems this list has in any meaningful  way. 
>>  
>> - Steve
>>  
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:07 PM Kasper Østerbye
>> mailto:kasper.oster...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> When I read the Code of conduct which is part of Pharo, my reaction
>>> was "OK, I don't expect to run into trouble over that one, so no
>>> worries".  
>>>
>>> After having read the discussion here I would rather it was not there.
>>>
>>> -- Kasper 
>>>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-19 Thread serge . stinckwich



Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Sep 2019, at 11:22, PBKResearch  wrote:
> 
> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
> unclear situation. The github entry at 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
> still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
> Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. 
> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>  
> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with the 
> board. Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo community? 
> Does the fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted by the community – 
> not just for this mailing list, but for all Pharo activities? If Serge did 
> not have authority, shouldn’t it just be removed, at least until the board 
> have discussed it?
> 

I didn’t understand what you want to imply here ? It was a mistake from me to 
push this PR without prior discussion.

I think that this discussion with be done at the level of the Pharo board now.


> The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we need a code 
> of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now been closed. Does that 
> mean that James’s proposal has been rejected? If so, why?
>  
> If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly accepting 
> that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly accepting how it got 
> there. What is necessary is for the board collectively, or someone 
> representing the board, to tell us what the situation is and what is going to 
> happen next – preferably with justifications.
>  
> Peter Kenny
>  
> From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Steve 
> Quezadas
> Sent: 19 September 2019 03:35
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct
>  
> Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this maillist is 
> that its very community oriented and everyone here helps each other. It's 
> devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I would find on, say, 
> facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that platform anymore.
>  
> And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people and make 
> fun of them or whatever, Like most people on this list doesn't already know 
> that. Im very vocal about certain political and social opinions, am not 
> ashamed about my opinions, am open about it, is currently "unpopular" but 
> don't discuss them here because it's offtopic and I don't want to piss off 
> people in any event. I don't want it turning into another facebook basically.
>  
> I think we should all close this conversation, it's offtopic and not relevant 
> to any problems this list has in any meaningful  way. 
>  
> - Steve
>  
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:07 PM Kasper Østerbye  
> wrote:
> When I read the Code of conduct which is part of Pharo, my reaction was "OK, 
> I don't expect to run into trouble over that one, so no worries".  
> 
> After having read the discussion here I would rather it was not there.
> 
> -- Kasper

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct



> On 19 Sep 2019, at 12:22, PBKResearch  wrote:
> 
> I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
> unclear situation. The github entry at 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md 
> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> is 
> still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 
> <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637> was abruptly closed by 
> Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich.

Yes it can be closed. 
As we will close ANY thread/issue/PR that directly insults one of the members 
of the community. 
Even more important: We can close it if thread has been highjacked by someone 
that has no name, no repositories, not anything that makes you think is a real 
member of the community or just a troll.

Members can do things right or wrong, as they are human beings. But emitting 
opinions in the way they were emitted about what they did is a no-go. 

So yes, you can discuss anything you want. 
But I personally will moderate any thread that does not discusses things in a 
civilised way.

So you have been warned :)

Esteban

PS: I will also remember you that the purpose of this community is to make 
Pharo a great development environment. 
And we are all here because we all pursue that.
 We create a software that is open source and wants to have some social value 
added.

> This is therefore the only place questions can be asked.
>  
> We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with the 
> board. Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo community? 
> Does the fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted by the community – 
> not just for this mailing list, but for all Pharo activities? If Serge did 
> not have authority, shouldn’t it just be removed, at least until the board 
> have discussed it?
>  
> The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we need a code 
> of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now been closed. Does that 
> mean that James’s proposal has been rejected? If so, why?
>  
> If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly accepting 
> that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly accepting how it got 
> there. What is necessary is for the board collectively, or someone 
> representing the board, to tell us what the situation is and what is going to 
> happen next – preferably with justifications.
>  
> Peter Kenny 
>  
> From: Pharo-users  <mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org>> On Behalf Of Steve Quezadas
> Sent: 19 September 2019 03:35
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome  <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct
>  
> Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this maillist is 
> that its very community oriented and everyone here helps each other. It's 
> devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I would find on, say, 
> facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that platform anymore. 
>  
> And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people and make 
> fun of them or whatever, Like most people on this list doesn't already know 
> that. Im very vocal about certain political and social opinions, am not 
> ashamed about my opinions, am open about it, is currently "unpopular" but 
> don't discuss them here because it's offtopic and I don't want to piss off 
> people in any event. I don't want it turning into another facebook basically. 
>  
> I think we should all close this conversation, it's offtopic and not relevant 
> to any problems this list has in any meaningful  way. 
>  
> - Steve
>  
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:07 PM Kasper Østerbye  <mailto:kasper.oster...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> When I read the Code of conduct which is part of Pharo, my reaction was "OK, 
>> I don't expect to run into trouble over that one, so no worries".  
>> 
>> After having read the discussion here I would rather it was not there.
>> 
>> -- Kasper 
>>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

I don’t think this conversation can be closed while things are in the present 
unclear situation. The github entry at 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md is 
still there, and has been there since last May. The github discussion on 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637 was abruptly closed by 
Stephane Ducasse, after some intemperate comments about Serge Stinckwich. This 
is therefore the only place questions can be asked.

 

We now know that Serge posted the Code without prior discussion with the board. 
Did he have authority to do this on behalf of the Pharo community? Does the 
fact that he did so mean it is officially adopted by the community – not just 
for this mailing list, but for all Pharo activities? If Serge did not have 
authority, shouldn’t it just be removed, at least until the board have 
discussed it?

 

The PR mentioned above was a proposal by James Foster that, if we need a code 
of conduct, it should be the ACM code. The PR has now been closed. Does that 
mean that James’s proposal has been rejected? If so, why?

 

If the conversation is closed now, that means that we are tacitly accepting 
that the code is there and in force, and also tacitly accepting how it got 
there. What is necessary is for the board collectively, or someone representing 
the board, to tell us what the situation is and what is going to happen next – 
preferably with justifications.

 

Peter Kenny 

 

From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Steve 
Quezadas
Sent: 19 September 2019 03:35
To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] R: Code of Conduct

 

Yeah, I agree. Why is this even here? The thing I like about this maillist is 
that its very community oriented and everyone here helps each other. It's 
devoid of all the political-soapbox nonsense that I would find on, say, 
facebook. Which is why I don't deal with that platform anymore. 

 

And most of this is common sense anyway. Yeah, don't harass people and make fun 
of them or whatever, Like most people on this list doesn't already know that. 
Im very vocal about certain political and social opinions, am not ashamed about 
my opinions, am open about it, is currently "unpopular" but don't discuss them 
here because it's offtopic and I don't want to piss off people in any event. I 
don't want it turning into another facebook basically. 

 

I think we should all close this conversation, it's offtopic and not relevant 
to any problems this list has in any meaningful  way. 

 

- Steve

 

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:07 PM Kasper Østerbye mailto:kasper.oster...@gmail.com> > wrote:

When I read the Code of conduct which is part of Pharo, my reaction was "OK, I 
don't expect to run into trouble over that one, so no worries".  

After having read the discussion here I would rather it was not there.

-- Kasper

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread John Pfersich

+100

//
For encrypted mail use jgpfers...@protonmail.com
Get a free account at ProtonMail.com
Web: www.objectnets.net and www.objectnets.org

> On Sep 17, 2019, at 16:29, Ramon Leon  wrote:
> 
>> On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
>> as I say the important issue is to provide safe
>> spaces via explicit or implicit rules
> 
> I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal opinions, 
> others may disagree.  "Safe spaces" are bad things, not good things; the 
> world is not a safe space, it is not the responsibility of others to provide 
> one a feeling of safety in a an online community where people merely exchange 
> words. Words are not dangerous, you are already safe. If you don't like what 
> someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. Safe space a euphemism for 
> censorship and exclusion, people who want safe spaces want to exclude other 
> people who might express ideas or opinions that they disagree with. Safe 
> spaces are anti-free speech zones.
> 
> They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than the child 
> for the world; they are inherently narcissistic. Intellectual discourse is 
> supposed to be challenging to your beliefs, you're supposed to confront ideas 
> you might not like or agree with and people you might have a hard time 
> getting along with. If you submit code to a technical forum you should expect 
> criticism and debate.  Technical discussions should resolve around the ideas 
> being presented, not around the identities of those involved, and ideas 
> should always be open to critique and debate. I don't care what one's sex or 
> gender are or what color one's skin is or political beliefs are; those things 
> have no place in a technical forum. I watch these groups to see discussions 
> about technology like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside.
> 
> It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no need for a 
> code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem intended only to divide 
> and punish for political ends.  Maybe I'm just getting old, but the younger 
> generation is far too coddled and expectant of the world to adjust to their 
> feelings rather than learning how to deal with the world and others who have 
> different ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas.
> 
> -- 
> Ramón León
> 
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread Smalltalk


I do not agree to have a code of conduct.

In my 20 years in the various Smalltalk communities i never saw any 
harassment or whatever (quite the opposite).


Self organization is much better, if someone "misbehave" it will be 
ignored by those who think that action was "misbehavior".



El 18/09/2019 a las 8:51, Tomaž Turk escribió:

> One doesn't need a Code of Conduct. It is ridiculous.
>
> Civilized and respectful non discriminating behaviour should
> be implicit in everyone of us!
>
> If one insists in having a code of conduct than this should cover it 
all:

> "Be Nice, Social And Respectful To Each Living Being."

+100

Best wishes,
Tomaz

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread Tomaž Turk


> One doesn't need a Code of Conduct. It is ridiculous.
>
> Civilized and respectful non discriminating behaviour should
> be implicit in everyone of us!
>
> If one insists in having a code of conduct than this should cover it 
all:

> "Be Nice, Social And Respectful To Each Living Being."

+100

Best wishes,
Tomaz

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread TedVanGaalen

Couldn't resist entering this doubtful CoC thread,
just to enter a few lines and then I am gone again.

One doesn't need a Code of Conduct. It is ridiculous.

Civilized and respectful non discriminating behaviour should
be implicit in everyone of us!

If one insists in having a code of conduct than this should cover it all:
"Be Nice, Social And Respectful To Each Living Being."
(at times this is not easy)

If this is too complicated for one to understand and not enough
to stay on the right track, then know that there already
are "CoC"s on an encompassing higher scope: by constitutional law:

In most civilized democratic countries and also the European Union
the primary laws (constitutions) offer protection of citizens
against any form of discrimination and primitive harassment.

If one would have the opinion that these constitutional laws
are not good enough and/or that these laws are not completely respected
then I'd suggest to take part in democratic processes to improve this
situation.

If one cannot obey these laws, then, for example:

-Move to a country e.g. with an undemocratic, human rights ignoring
government,
mostly dictatorial ones, which might suit one's anti social discriminating
behaviour better.
(probably the most ultimate environment to get acquainted with one's own
shortcomings)

-try to be more emphatic, this world is overpopulated, with high stress
levels,
an incredibly fast changing environment, where empathy
and social behaviour are more important than ever.

Ergo:
In short if one harasses, discriminates people, one is violating the law.
There is no place for this on forums,
There is no place for this anywhere in a civilized world.

As stated in the European constitution:
"The Union's values.
The Union is founded on the values of respect for
human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality,
the rule of law and respect for human rights,
including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.
These values are common to the Member States in
a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance,
justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail"

This is written on page 17 art: I-2 in
https://europa.eu/european-union/sites/europaeu/files/docs/body/treaty_establishing_a_constitution_for_europe_en.pdf

After this I will only enter this forum with IT / Smalltalk related
themes. That is the purpose of this forum.
Kind Regards.
TedvG

--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread PBKResearch

Serge

 

Your post does not really answer James’s questions about the status of the 
Code. It seems you personally posted the Code on Github, without prior 
discussion with the Board. Is this a proposal by you, for discussion by the 
Board, or does posting it there mean it is adopted as the effective Code for 
the Pharo community? The github post just quotes the code, without explanation.

 

As to the content of the code, I still believe that, if the board can undertake 
punitive actions like banning, there must be some concept of ‘due process’, 
with the right to defend oneself. The referenced FAQ suggests that, if one is 
accused of a breach, the only response is to admit guilt and work with the 
accusers to reform. I am also worried by the suggestions that complaints can be 
anonymous, and that the anonymity of the complainant must be protected.

 

Peter Kenny

 

From: Pharo-users  On Behalf Of Serge 
Stinckwich
Sent: 18 September 2019 08:33
To: Any question about pharo is welcome 
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 2:11 AM James Foster mailto:smallt...@jgfoster.net> > wrote:

One side-effect of the “Covenant” discussion is that it is necessarily 
political, which is something that many (rightly, in my view) are trying to 
avoid. While I agree with most of the views expressed so far, I cringe because 
I anticipate that someone who disagrees will feel the compulsion to tell us 
that we are wrong, and things will go bad from there.

 

I haven’t reviewed the full email chain, but I’ve spent a few minutes searching 
pharo.org <http://pharo.org>  for “code of conduct” and “covenant” and come up 
empty. Before we continue the discussion of how “woke" (politically correct) we 
want to be, could someone confirm that this "dastardly deed" (imposing a 
progressive “Covenant” without asking for agreement) was actually done? Maybe a 
troll has just dropped a fire cracker on us and is sitting back, enjoying 
watching us run around screaming!

 

If there was, indeed, adoption of a “Covenant” it should have been done by the 
board whose role “is to make decisions if in the future the community can't 
decide on a course of action” (https://pharo.org/about). 

 

I suggest that we suspend discussion of the politics of speech codes until we 
confirm that there is one for Pharo. At that point we politely (but pointedly) 
ask the board (publicly and privately) to explain what prompted the decision to 
adopt a Code (is it really necessary?) and how this one was selected. Note that 
part of the reason for limiting discussion is to avoid attracting attention of 
outsiders who will want to shape the discussion. Let’s stop kicking up dust for 
the moment!

 

 

Dear James,

I'm the one who submit the PR for the CoC. Similar text are adopted by a lot of 
open-source communities or conferences in order to enhance diversity.

I read again this morning the document here: 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

and for me this quite neutral and I see nothing political here.

I agree with you that this kind of document should have been discussed by the 
Pharo board and you can propose it for the next meeting.

 

I'm a bit suprised by some overeactions here on the mailing-list.

Apparently the Pharo community will be soon be doomed or under attack of nasty 
leftist activists ...

But I will not discuss endlessly about that.

 

If we need a Code of Conduct, I respectfully suggest we start with ACM 
(https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics) which has what should be adequate 
anti-discrimination provisions (see 1.4 for a list of “underrepresented” 
groups) to satisfy the progressives among us.

 

 

Thank you James to move the discussion on github.

 

Cheers,

-- 

Serge Stinckwic

h

 

Int. Research Unit

 on Modelling/Simulation of Complex Systems (UMMISCO)

Sorbonne University

 (SU)

French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD)

U

niversity of Yaoundé I, Cameroon


"Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for 
machines to execute."
https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-18 Thread Serge Stinckwich

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 2:11 AM James Foster  wrote:

> One side-effect of the “Covenant” discussion is that it is necessarily
> political, which is something that many (rightly, in my view) are trying to
> avoid. While I agree with most of the views expressed so far, I cringe
> because I anticipate that someone who disagrees will feel the compulsion to
> tell us that we are wrong, and things will go bad from there.
>
> I haven’t reviewed the full email chain, but I’ve spent a few minutes
> searching pharo.org for “code of conduct” and “covenant” and come up
> empty. Before we continue the discussion of how “woke" (politically
> correct) we want to be, could someone confirm that this "dastardly deed"
> (imposing a progressive “Covenant” without asking for agreement) was
> actually done? Maybe a troll has just dropped a fire cracker on us and is
> sitting back, enjoying watching us run around screaming!
>
> If there was, indeed, adoption of a “Covenant” it should have been done by
> the board whose role “is to make decisions if in the future the community
> can't decide on a course of action” (https://pharo.org/about).
>
> I suggest that we *suspend discussion* of the politics of speech codes
> until we confirm that there is one for Pharo. At that point we politely
> (but pointedly) ask the board (publicly and privately) to explain what
> prompted the decision to adopt a Code (is it really necessary?) and how
> this one was selected. Note that part of the reason for limiting discussion
> is to avoid attracting attention of outsiders who will want to shape the
> discussion. Let’s stop kicking up dust for the moment!
>
>
Dear James,
I'm the one who submit the PR for the CoC. Similar text are adopted by a
lot of open-source communities or conferences in order to enhance diversity.
I read again this morning the document here:
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
and for me this quite neutral and I see nothing political here.
I agree with you that this kind of document should have been discussed by
the Pharo board and you can propose it for the next meeting.

I'm a bit suprised by some overeactions here on the mailing-list.
Apparently the Pharo community will be soon be doomed or under attack of
nasty leftist activists ...
But I will not discuss endlessly about that.


> If we need a Code of Conduct, I respectfully suggest we start with ACM (
> https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics) which has what should be adequate
> anti-discrimination provisions (see 1.4 for a list of “underrepresented”
> groups) to satisfy the progressives among us.
>
>
Thank you James to move the discussion on github.

Cheers,
-- 
Serge Stinckwic
h

Int. Research Unit
 on Modelling/Simulation of Complex Systems (UMMISCO)
Sorbonne University
 (SU)
French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD)
U
niversity of Yaoundé I, Cameroon
"Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for
machines to execute."
https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas

I'm a member of several communities which are welcoming and diverse,
without a explicit Code of Conduct. That's doesn't mean that such
communities doesn't see the political nature of technology, or that the
way people participate on such communities is not deeply informed on who
the participants are. I don't think that people just exchange words, but
I don't think that we need to go, at least at this moment, to Speech
Acts Theory or other approach on how words are mostly not "just words".
But this is informed by my particular context and education. In some
countries free speech is not an absolute right and for example is
subordinated to non-defamatory or non-violent speech.

So while I agree, as Esteban, Ramon and others have pointed, on the view
that this is a community where discussions are usually civilized and we
can agree to disagree, like in this very subject, I don't think that
"technology is neutral" or "politics are bad" or identity/context
doesn't inform participation, but usually these are blind spots for
people under privileged circumstances. That doesn't mean that I agreed
with the Covenants CoC neither. And even when this position seems like a
non-position, what I'm trying to showcase is that there are a lot of
grays in the binary reading of we can have safe spaces for people or we
can have discussions on ideas, but not both. I believe that there is
much to think about yet, at least on a personal level and hopefully at
some point on a community one. I will take a pause from this thread to
think it more deeply.

Cheers,

Offray

On 17/09/19 6:32 p. m., Richard O'Keefe wrote:
> You just wrote what I didn't quite dare to say.
> Thank you.
>
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 11:29, Ramon Leon  > wrote:
>
> On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
> > as I say the important issue is to provide safe
> > spaces via explicit or implicit rules
>
> I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal
> opinions, others may disagree.  "Safe spaces" are bad things, not
> good things; the world is not a safe space, it is not the
> responsibility of others to provide one a feeling of safety in a
> an online community where people merely exchange words. Words are
> not dangerous, you are already safe. If you don't like what
> someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. Safe space a
> euphemism for censorship and exclusion, people who want safe
> spaces want to exclude other people who might express ideas or
> opinions that they disagree with. Safe spaces are anti-free speech
> zones.
>
> They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than
> the child for the world; they are inherently narcissistic.
> Intellectual discourse is supposed to be challenging to your
> beliefs, you're supposed to confront ideas you might not like or
> agree with and people you might have a hard time getting along
> with. If you submit code to a technical forum you should expect
> criticism and debate.  Technical discussions should resolve around
> the ideas being presented, not around the identities of those
> involved, and ideas should always be open to critique and debate.
> I don't care what one's sex or gender are or what color one's skin
> is or political beliefs are; those things have no place in a
> technical forum. I watch these groups to see discussions about
> technology like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside.
>
> It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no
> need for a code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem
> intended only to divide and punish for political ends.  Maybe I'm
> just getting old, but the younger generation is far too coddled
> and expectant of the world to adjust to their feelings rather than
> learning how to deal with the world and others who have different
> ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas.
>
> -- 
> Ramón León
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread James Foster

> On Sep 17, 2019, at 5:19 PM, Ramon Leon  wrote:
> 
> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

Thanks. I’ve submitted a PR to use ACM. Let’s move the discussion to 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/4637.

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct


On 2019-09-17 5:11 p.m., James Foster wrote:

If there was, indeed, adoption of a “Covenant” it should have been done by the 
board whose role “is to make decisions if in the future the community can't 
decide on a course of action” (https://pharo.org/about).

I suggest that we suspend discussion of the politics of speech codes until we 
confirm that there is one for Pharo.


https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/Pharo8.0/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread James Foster

One side-effect of the “Covenant” discussion is that it is necessarily 
political, which is something that many (rightly, in my view) are trying to 
avoid. While I agree with most of the views expressed so far, I cringe because 
I anticipate that someone who disagrees will feel the compulsion to tell us 
that we are wrong, and things will go bad from there.

I haven’t reviewed the full email chain, but I’ve spent a few minutes searching 
pharo.org for “code of conduct” and “covenant” and come up empty. Before we 
continue the discussion of how “woke" (politically correct) we want to be, 
could someone confirm that this "dastardly deed" (imposing a progressive 
“Covenant” without asking for agreement) was actually done? Maybe a troll has 
just dropped a fire cracker on us and is sitting back, enjoying watching us run 
around screaming!

If there was, indeed, adoption of a “Covenant” it should have been done by the 
board whose role “is to make decisions if in the future the community can't 
decide on a course of action” (https://pharo.org/about). 

I suggest that we suspend discussion of the politics of speech codes until we 
confirm that there is one for Pharo. At that point we politely (but pointedly) 
ask the board (publicly and privately) to explain what prompted the decision to 
adopt a Code (is it really necessary?) and how this one was selected. Note that 
part of the reason for limiting discussion is to avoid attracting attention of 
outsiders who will want to shape the discussion. Let’s stop kicking up dust for 
the moment!

If we need a Code of Conduct, I respectfully suggest we start with ACM 
(https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics) which has what should be adequate 
anti-discrimination provisions (see 1.4 for a list of “underrepresented” 
groups) to satisfy the progressives among us.

James Foster

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread Richard O'Keefe

You just wrote what I didn't quite dare to say.
Thank you.

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 11:29, Ramon Leon  wrote:

> On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
> > as I say the important issue is to provide safe
> > spaces via explicit or implicit rules
>
> I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal opinions,
> others may disagree.  "Safe spaces" are bad things, not good things; the
> world is not a safe space, it is not the responsibility of others to
> provide one a feeling of safety in a an online community where people
> merely exchange words. Words are not dangerous, you are already safe. If
> you don't like what someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. Safe space
> a euphemism for censorship and exclusion, people who want safe spaces want
> to exclude other people who might express ideas or opinions that they
> disagree with. Safe spaces are anti-free speech zones.
>
> They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than the
> child for the world; they are inherently narcissistic. Intellectual
> discourse is supposed to be challenging to your beliefs, you're supposed to
> confront ideas you might not like or agree with and people you might have a
> hard time getting along with. If you submit code to a technical forum you
> should expect criticism and debate.  Technical discussions should resolve
> around the ideas being presented, not around the identities of those
> involved, and ideas should always be open to critique and debate. I don't
> care what one's sex or gender are or what color one's skin is or political
> beliefs are; those things have no place in a technical forum. I watch these
> groups to see discussions about technology like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside.
>
> It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no need for
> a code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem intended only to
> divide and punish for political ends.  Maybe I'm just getting old, but the
> younger generation is far too coddled and expectant of the world to adjust
> to their feelings rather than learning how to deal with the world and
> others who have different ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas.
>
> --
> Ramón León
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct


On 2019-09-17 4:26 p.m., Richard O'Keefe wrote:

I see the
so-called "Covenant" that we are discussing as another example of this urge to
micro-control other people.  It has me nervously looking for the exit.


I couldn't agree more.

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct


On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:

as I say the important issue is to provide safe
spaces via explicit or implicit rules


I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal opinions, others may 
disagree.  "Safe spaces" are bad things, not good things; the world is not a 
safe space, it is not the responsibility of others to provide one a feeling of safety in 
a an online community where people merely exchange words. Words are not dangerous, you 
are already safe. If you don't like what someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. 
Safe space a euphemism for censorship and exclusion, people who want safe spaces want to 
exclude other people who might express ideas or opinions that they disagree with. Safe 
spaces are anti-free speech zones.

They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than the child 
for the world; they are inherently narcissistic. Intellectual discourse is 
supposed to be challenging to your beliefs, you're supposed to confront ideas 
you might not like or agree with and people you might have a hard time getting 
along with. If you submit code to a technical forum you should expect criticism 
and debate.  Technical discussions should resolve around the ideas being 
presented, not around the identities of those involved, and ideas should always 
be open to critique and debate. I don't care what one's sex or gender are or 
what color one's skin is or political beliefs are; those things have no place 
in a technical forum. I watch these groups to see discussions about technology 
like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside.

It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no need for a 
code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem intended only to divide 
and punish for political ends.  Maybe I'm just getting old, but the younger 
generation is far too coddled and expectant of the world to adjust to their 
feelings rather than learning how to deal with the world and others who have 
different ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas.

--
Ramón León

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread Richard O'Keefe

Correspondents should be warned that the phrase "safe spaces" needs a
trigger warning.
I am not joking here.  People who are genuinely sensitive to the
perceptions and
concerns of others really should avoid that concept because there are many
people in
whom it arouses strong negative feelings.  Who indeed feel belittled and
excluded by
it.  "Point of personal privilege..."

I want this mailing list to serve the ends of advancing the development of
Pharo,
supporting the people who use Pharo in learning how to use it effectively,
and more generally serving humanity by advancing the art of programming.
The announcement of Grafoscopio and the help given when people have
problems with
it?  Perfect example, hugely respect-worthy.  There are plenty of others.

Is there, in fact, enough of a problem here for us to NEED a special code,
over and
above say the ACM or BCS or whatever codes of ethics?  At the department I
used to
be in, from time to time someone would raise an issue at a staff meeting,
and we'd
all start thinking about how to craft a rule to cover us.  But the wisest
of us
would usually say "Do we actually need a rule for this?  Is this happening
a lot,
or is it something rare that we can deal with informally?"  Whenever he
asked this,
he was right.  It *was* something rare that could be dealt with human to
human.

I was talking to a graduate student one day.  He had a lot of commercial
experience.
I had been reading up about BPML and commented to him "it's as if
businesses wanted
to program people like machines".  He responded, "yes they do."  He was
able to
give me more examples than I really wanted from his own experience.  I see
the
so-called "Covenant" that we are discussing as another example of this urge
to
micro-control other people.  It has me nervously looking for the exit.

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 09:35, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <
offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote:

> Ramon,
>
> I'm not talking about the Covenant code in particular. Is not the only
> code out there and as I say the important issue is to provide safe
> spaces via explicit or implicit rules. Each community decides which is
> the best way to be welcomed and respectful and how this is clear to its
> members and outsiders.
>
> I don't think that technology and politics are so far away as usually
> depicted, particularly in the Global North, as both deal with power
> dynamics but technology embeds it in infrastructure. But seems that
> politics is kind of a tainted word there and just bring it opens a
> Pandora box.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Offray
>
>
> On 17/09/19 11:38 a. m., Ramon Leon wrote:
> > On 2019-09-17 6:28 a.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > The code of conducts intent is to force identity politics into
> > technical spaces in the name of social justice and to make someone
> > feeling offended an actionable reason to go after the supposed
> > offender; never mind that offense is taken rather than given.
> > Nevermind that anyone can claim to be offended by just about anything.
> > The goal is to get the project to agree to kick people out for
> > violating the utterly vague and subjective rules.
> >
> > Here's some more quotes from the author of said code of conduct.
> >
> > "Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political
> > document, and they’re right."
> >
> > "I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been
> > infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah"
> >
> > "Meritocracy is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy
> > propping up fragile cis het white men's egos"
> >
> > "Meritocracy is late stage patriarchy"
> >
> > "Why didn’t anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi air time?"
> >
> > He is a radical left transgender activist, his intentions are purely
> > political, the CoC is merely a means to an end and is used by him to
> > setup situations in which he can cancel people in this new cancel
> > culture. He wants to replace meritocracy with identity politics. This
> > is the CoC that ran Linus out of Linux, a massive loss to the OS
> > community.  This is not a horse you want to hitch your wagon to Pharo.
> >
>
>
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas

Ramon,

I'm not talking about the Covenant code in particular. Is not the only
code out there and as I say the important issue is to provide safe
spaces via explicit or implicit rules. Each community decides which is
the best way to be welcomed and respectful and how this is clear to its
members and outsiders.

I don't think that technology and politics are so far away as usually
depicted, particularly in the Global North, as both deal with power
dynamics but technology embeds it in infrastructure. But seems that
politics is kind of a tainted word there and just bring it opens a
Pandora box.

Cheers,

Offray


On 17/09/19 11:38 a. m., Ramon Leon wrote:
> On 2019-09-17 6:28 a.m., Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
>> 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.
>
> The code of conducts intent is to force identity politics into
> technical spaces in the name of social justice and to make someone
> feeling offended an actionable reason to go after the supposed
> offender; never mind that offense is taken rather than given.
> Nevermind that anyone can claim to be offended by just about anything.
> The goal is to get the project to agree to kick people out for
> violating the utterly vague and subjective rules.
>
> Here's some more quotes from the author of said code of conduct.
>
> "Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political
> document, and they’re right."
>
> "I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been
> infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah"
>
> "Meritocracy is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy
> propping up fragile cis het white men's egos"
>
> "Meritocracy is late stage patriarchy"
>
> "Why didn’t anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi air time?"
>
> He is a radical left transgender activist, his intentions are purely
> political, the CoC is merely a means to an end and is used by him to
> setup situations in which he can cancel people in this new cancel
> culture. He wants to replace meritocracy with identity politics. This
> is the CoC that ran Linus out of Linux, a massive loss to the OS
> community.  This is not a horse you want to hitch your wagon to Pharo.
>

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

2019-09-17 Thread Esteban Maringolo

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:28 AM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
 wrote:
> 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 movement in LATAM started by the use of gender-neutral plurals,
with some phonetic aberrations that cannot be even spelled to a more
pronunciable alternative that seems to be sticking. Actually it's very
easy to spot SJW because they overuse such language. There were some
attempts to use it in pronouns, but apparently there is a language
thing in Spanish that makes it harder to stick.

> 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".

It's simple to define improper behavior as something that is not
aligned with the objective or purpose of the mailing list.

> We may lock for examples in different communities to see which one fits 
> better our own.

It is, but the simpler the rules the simple to enforce them.
E.g. I've been part of a team of 10 moderators in an online community
of 40K+ members (with 1% active daily) for over two years now, we grew
our own CoC over time, but it is not harmful as this "Covenant"
proposed. And in that amount of members I can guarantee you (by
experience) that there is a myriad of different opinions even within
the "clusters" of those ruled by identity politics.

> This is an important conversation to have, once it has been raised.

Maybe, but as I said before, this mailing list, and the community in
general is very civilized, even by old Internet standards.

Regards,

Esteban A. Maringolo

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct