Looks fun :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm very glad they have community servers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sweet! This is worth picking up.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It is quite a joy to play :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: chrFor the record, I too am an extremist, but it isn't relevant to this discussion and extreme views are no reason for uncivil behavior generally.

I agree that extremism should be welcome and allowed and that uncivil behavior is where codes of conduct should focus, rather than the politics (extreme or not) of a community member.

Quoting: chrBtw I think calling someone an extremist is maybe also a form of name-calling, as in addition to the descriptive meaning (someone who is extreme in their views) a judging aspect was also present ("those people are bad/invalid"), I feel.

I agree. Over the past few days I've reflected on the way I've expressed things here. I probably shouldn't have used that specific wording, and/or shouldn't have used specific names.

I'd like to apologize for the way I phrased my statement. Sorry.

As I thought about the concept of extremism, I wondered where the bar is set for that descriptor. If everyone in the world has an extreme world view, is that view no longer an extremist one? If so, the term "extremist" would mostly be redefined to mean "nonconforming", which is a beneficial trait except in authoritarian structures.

Quoting: chrDonald Trump, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates have unimaginably more power over Godot than even the project leaders, even if they never exercise it (or specifically realize they have it).

I suppose that could potentially be true. Regardless, if any of those figures wanted to contribute to a FOSS project, I would hope that the project would welcome them with open arms. Regardless of what their personal impressions of them might be outside of the project.

I mostly just want to see an open and inclusive community that would welcome anyone who tries to bring more to the table than they take away regardless of what they believe. Regardless of "who" they were.

Regardless of where they donate their money.
Regardless of their opinions on certain high-profile criminals.
Regardless of their opinions on any hot-button issues.

Regardless of how they identify or the labels that others apply to them.

As long as they kept the off-topic stuff in the proper channels, either by avoiding that type of conversation in the community, or by directing it to an off-topic forum.

Quoting: chrWe want to limit the exclusion of people based on any unchangeable aspects of a person. And I feel there is no middle ground between accepting all people based on their unchangeable aspects of person AND accepting people who via their actions/speech exclude other people based on their unchangeable aspects of their person. You can either tolerate one or the other, not both.

I agree that we should avoid the exclusion of people based on immutable aspects of their being.

I think it is okay for bigots to exist. It is okay for all manner of folks to exist. It is okay for folks to have opinions that are incompatible with mine. It is okay for a demographic to believe that my demographic shouldn't exist and/or shouldn't have any rights.

It is okay to disagree with me. Disagreement alone should never be a reason to exclude someone from a community.

How that disagreement manifests is a far more important facet to focus on than the disagreement itself.

Quoting: chrI might completely be wrong, but I didn't get this impression and therefore feel that this is an unfair conclusion.

I came to that conclusion as a result of folks seeming to express that they'd like to discriminate and gatekeep based on their subjective impression of who someone was rather than objective measurements of what they do in the community.

If Thanos or Satan, for example, wanted to be a part of a community, I say please let them. If, through their actions in the community alone you cannot determine that they are actually causing harm, please be tolerant enough to accept them as members of the community.

If someone is considered to be bigoted in various ways, that alone shouldn't be a reason to exclude them from a community. If they take actions within the community that are vile, that is different.

If I were to potentially mislabel someone as an extremist and the CoC had a ban on extremists being part of the community, I'd hope that some type of objective measurement could be applied to determine that I was the one at fault for applying the label in an overly broad manner.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Looks amazing!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuyPlease share with us an objective definition of "definition".

Valid. I concede that point.

Quoting: Purple Library GuyBut I've noticed that generally nobody has that hard a time getting what they mean across and nobody worries that much about this stuff unless either
1) They have an English Literature paper due and their prof is into postmodernism, or
2) They want to evade the common meanings of something for political reasons.

I agree with you partially about "2)".

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI've got it made.

This isn't about you, and you don't speak on behalf of folks who share your biological demographics.

Quoting: Purple Library Guythe fact that people worry more about one kind of discrimination than another does not affect the typical remedy proposed

I'd love for that to be the case. The CoC appears to be neutral on that front, which is why I posted in support of that fact.

However, some of the folks in this thread have wanted to take things above and beyond what the CoC states. You're responding to my response to those folks.

Quoting: Purple Library Guyprejudice is a problem largely because it is used by those with more power to step on those with less.

Correct. Aside from the fact that "power" is subjective, let's look at the folks who do have power in this realm.

https://godotengine.org/code-of-conduct [External Link]

Akien, QbieShay, TMM, and vnen

They've done a great job coming up with a CoC that helps treat all manner of folks in an equitable manner.

If Kimyrielle or scaine were to have written the CoC, based on their comments here, I assume it would contain more lopsided and biased language.

If they were on the committee that determines who to punish for violations, I'd have strong concerns, unless there were other extremists on the board to provide counterbalance their wishes.

Quoting: Purple Library GuySome white males like to pretend that pendulums have shifted so far, people are worrying so much about (various other groups) that now we're somehow the oppressed group, but it's the most utter patent bullshit. White guys still have the money and the power and better interest rates and less chance of getting whacked by cops and on and on and on. The utterly wimpy fear I often see displayed, of the prospect of having to operate on a level playing field with everyone else, shames me.

This last bit of your post is a bit disappointing to me and I'm not sure how to address it.

I wish it were easier to treat members of the out group (those who disagree with the majority in a specific group) with more respect.

Yes, some members of the out group (any out group) have terrible traits. Focusing on those terrible traits and applying them to the whole group is not cool.

If we write our rules in a manner that avoids mentioning any out groups, or in groups, we can have rules that are fair.

In short, I'm glad the CoC avoids many of the traps that we've fallen into with this discussion.

It could use a bit of improvement though, as could most things.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KimyrielleBut yes, I do really not think that racism, misogyny, sexism, homophobia and bigotry qualify as "civil dissent" by any stretch of imagination, and neither are any of these things an "opinion". Being a pathetic moron isn't an "opinion". I guess that's really the thing where we don't agree on.

Please share with us objective definitions of "racism", "misogyny", "sexism", and "bigotry".

Too often these terms are defined in a subjective manner.

Please note that it is quite possible to be racist against (or for) any race, including white.

Please note that it is quite possible to be sexist against (or for) any gender, including male.

If using the term "misogyny" in a document, please include "misandry" as well or the document has a gender bias.

When the terms regarding bigotry are used without a clear, public, and *objective* definition, they can (and do) create an environment where it is acceptable to discriminate against folks for their biology.

I'm in full support of denouncing bigotry in all forms.

I'm in full support of having clear codes of conduct that use objective language to describe the folks they want as part of their community.

I'm completely *against* using the terms for bigotry that focus solely on bigotry against certain genders, certain races and certain ideologies.

Bigotry is not a trait that is only held by folks who hate a specific demographic. Bigotry exists against all demographics, even the ones that are seen as the oppressors.

(Edit: It seems like you're coming awfully close to calling me a "pathetic moron". That is quite acceptable. However, in the spirit of having a productive conversation I'd like to request that we refrain from trying to insult anyone. Even if they're hypothetical.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineSo you'll avoid Godot? Because if I had a position of power in any project, I'd support using their CoC.

Quoting: psyminI should avoid contributing to projects where they have positions of power.

If you are in a position of power in the Godot community, yes, I'd avoid contributing to Godot.

I can take the CoC at face value, but when it is coupled with activism from folks in positions of power within the community it can take a very sinister turn.

I wouldn't avoid using the engine, or playing games that are created with it.

But I prefer to put my energies into communities that are welcoming of civil dissent and diversity of opinion.

I'm in support of communities having codes of conduct that accurately and publicly reflect the types of folks they want in their communities. It helps make an informed decision to avoid the community if necessary.

It is a win/win.

But, this is just a hypothetical, since I don't think you're in a position of power in Godot. If you are, please let me know so that I can steer clear, for your benefit and my own.

Thankfully, those who have commented who seem to be in positions of power within Godot seem to be expressing an ideology that is more tolerant of folks like myself than some other communities are.

<3

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest@Scaine and Kimryelle, you have both taken some effort to explain us you would exclude people for what they are regardless of what they do.

Yep. I fully support them being able to express these opinions about how they'd like the systems to work.

It also helps me know that I should avoid contributing to projects where they have positions of power.

View this comment - View article - View full comments