Quoting: DolusAddress this: https://twitter.com/_sagesharp_/status/1042769399596437504 [External Link]

So Sharp is stirring up controversy over Tso and here you are stirring up controversy over Sharp.

Lets cut to the chase, and not make this about Tso, Sharp or anyone else. Here's a thought experiment: would you rather have the Linux kernel built by despicable people, and stick your head in the sand about them, or would you rather have a bit of accountability, and possibly have the kernel suffer as a result?

Personally, I'm in the latter camp. I try not to stick my head in the sand about anything. People should hold Apple and Samsung accountable for Chinese worker suicide rates at Foxconn. People should boycott Starbucks and Amazon in the UK because they offshore their taxes. And people should have the opportunity to address despicable behaviour in those contributing to the kernel.

To be clear - "address", not "insta-ban". It's a process.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GustyGhost

Quoting: scainelike every CoC out there, to ensure that you get plenty of opportunity to change your ways. To encourage you to be respectful.

At the risk of sounding contrarian, I would rather be in a place where people can be disrespectful yet honest with each other and with themselves than in a place which polices what they can say. Even if it is uncomfortable. Although I understand why such an atmosphere wouldn't be for everyone.

Happily, I think you're in a minority. And oddly, given your position, your reply to me was incredibly respectful: "at the risk of sounding contrarian <I respectfully disagree>".

A CoC won't prevent you saying things that are uncomfortable. They'll stop you saying things that are abusive, harmful, personal attacks. And as I keep saying, the people who want this are the same people who, in the past, could make such attacks on a whim, with no repercussion.

Anyone here use Gnome? Do you hate their CoC [External Link]? How about Ubuntu [External Link]? Anyone still running X.org [External Link]? You more of a Wayland [External Link] fan? KDE [External Link] float your boat?

Honestly, I'm sick of talking about this. The scaremongering and political agenda behind the "anti-SJW" movement is too depressing for words.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DolusExpect more and more of this. Just when GNU/Kernel was FINALLY getting to the point of being a viable platform for gaming, in come the corporate proxies shoving this COC and their politics down our collective throats. We DID not NEED this. We're already the underdog. And to the people supporting the COC, still think it's doing more good than harm?

a) there's no corporate oversight here. It's the kernel, business as usual. Proxies? Please, give the conspiracy theories a rest. No-one is "shoving" anything down anyone's throats.
b) many, many other projects have a CoC. It was long overdue for the kernel.
c) being the underdog doesn't mean you get to shit on people because of a lack of CoC. Having respect should be an absolute minimum for any project, open-source or otherwise.
d) yes, it will do good in the long term, once the dust settles. This is like Ubuntu's CoC all over again.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WYW

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: TuxeeThis is the most retarded "excuse" I've ever heard for abandoning a project. Being an open source contributor myself it has never occurred to me that some CoC for the Linux kernel has anything in the farthest to do with my work. This dude is working on a GUI tool written in Python - is he aware that the Python project has had a CoC for ages?

You broke the hypocrisy meter on the second page. Good job!

https://www.r-word.org/ [External Link]

Yah folk, the r word is offensive and ableist. Ableism is discrimination and social prejudice against people with disabilities.

I believe this to be hateful conduct and you will soon be informed of the projects you have been terminated from. /s

See the issue yet?

There is no issue. GOLs code of conduct asks to keep swearing to a minimum, and if you step over that line too much, perhaps Liam will ban you, and if so, you probably had it coming long before the ban hammer fell.

Personally, I detest the word "retarded" as much as you're making out, but having a CoC doesn't mean you get insta-banned for using it. It means you get a warning, then probably a moderation ban, then perhaps a user ban. It's a process, designed, like every CoC out there, to ensure that you get plenty of opportunity to change your ways. To encourage you to be respectful.

People who can't do such a simple thing? We're better off without them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: qptain Nemo

Quoting: scaineEVERYTHING is political.

I'm sorry but that is an insidious falsehood. It's entirely possible to live and do things, be kind to others in particular, without political thought.

Perhaps. Her point was that some people will make anything political, I think. And I suppose that's largely true. I like smarties, but someone will probably point out the evil of nestle to make my eating smarties political. Shop at Amazon or Starbucks? They don't pay their taxes - boycott them! And so on.

This should be simple. It shouldn't be political. But like when anarchists infiltrate a peaceful protest and start rioting, the same approach can be taken with something like a CoC. Some people will make anything a political movement.

What bugs me about this is the motivation. I just don't get it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: einherjarI fully understand him. The CoC is made by the person saying that:

I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah

after the CoC was taken to the Linux kernel.

Source [External Link]

Sure, this is a violation of the CoC (welcoming language). But doesn`t matter, it was one of the good(TM) people. And perhaps she/it/*? will never contribute code to linux kernel. So it`s ok?
I think these SJW people are like cancer. They don't behave like people, who want to make the world a better place. I have the feeling, its more like STASI.
Be welcoming to everyone sounds good. But it seems to mean, "for everyone the SJWs don`t dislike"... and the CoC is the ammo they need against people they dislike.

Very sad

Where to start with this?? :(

The tweet you sourced is a joke. She made the joke after realising the kernel maintainers used her CoC as the template for their CoC. And in her experience, whenever a CoC is introduced, there's a "Oh, those nasty SJWs at it again" outcry. Guess what... she was right.

"SJW people are like cancer". You think that people who want inclusiveness and respect... are like cancer. I can't respond to that.

"for everyone the SJWs don't dislike" - I'll repeat, the maintainers ALREADY HAD THIS POWER. That's why we call them maintainers. It's THEIR project. When Torvalds had enough of Kolivas, he literally told him to pack to his bags and fuck off. If there was a CoC, at least the merits of Kolivas' patch might have made the light of day. They didn't, because Torvalds was a sissy child and there was no CoC to control his behaviour.

This CoC takes a little power AWAY from dictator maintainers. Because it's INCLUSIVE by default.

But if you want to keep people calling people Stasi and cancer, that's the end of the discussion for me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: lucifertdark

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: XicronicFrom Coraline Ada Ehmke (writer of the CoC):

"Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political document, and they’re right."

If the author of the CoC admitting it is a political document made to out people she doesn't like doesn't convince you, I don't know what will. Maybe look at Opal and Ruby as examples?

https://twitter.com/CoralineAda/status/1041465346656530432 [External Link]

Please cite where you took the part made bold by me is from.

What's HIS real name?

Misgendering?? Please don't tell me you're transphobic... I have higher hopes for GOLs readership than that. SHE wrote the generic Code of Conduct which has been adopted by the kernel maintainers.

Sure, it's political. EVERYTHING is political. That doesn't make it a political movement. There's no conspiracy here. It's an attempt to make things better. They've been bad for years, this should be welcomed.

Weird that no-one is talking about Torvalds open letter either. This CoC isn't being forced on him against his will. His letter openly acknowledged the need for such a CoC and he admits that he's a shining example of why it's needed. He talks about the personal attacks he's made over the years and admits they're wrong.

Finally.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tmtvlYeah, the CoC literally says maintainers can, quote, 'ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.' As well as: 'Representation of a project may be further defined and clarified by project maintainers.'

I can see how some people might disagree with a text that basically gives maintainers carte blanche to ban whomever they want at any time.

As maintainers, they had that power all along. Kolivas maintains his own patches as a fork literally because Torvalds told him to take his patches and fuck off. Kolivas called his patches the "brain fuck kernel" for years as a stab at Torvalds & co.

This isn't the Steam Forums. It's the Linux Kernel and its mailing list. It's long overdue some "be excellent to each other".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: gabberIt's vague and not focused.

Threatening, Offensive and Harmful behaviour? That's not vague. "Inappropriate" isn't as useful a word, but honestly, if you get to the point where there's any prospect of this line being used against you, it's likely that you've already thrown a few grenades and burned a few bridges on your way there.

I can see some issues where someone takes honest criticism the wrong way. Especially in text, it's hard to convey conviction without appearing aggressive. But not impossible.

Is anyone really, literally, against making the Linux kernel a more acceptable, inclusive space?!? If so, by all means quibble about specific language in it, but the moment you proclaim it to be a "political movement" to "grab power", you've lost me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Basically, some people are conflating "Linux has a CoC" to "Social Justice Warriors have forced Linux to have a Code of Conduct they don't agree with", and so now it's a "political movement".

I can't understand how "be nice to each other" can be construed in any way other than positive. But critics are ignoring the fact that most major projects have a CoC and Linux was an exception, and are flag waving that this means that dissent of any kind can result in you being banned from the kernel.

As if that didn't already happen. Ask Con Kolivas, for example, who now maintains a kernel fork on his own website after falling out with Torvalds spectacularly a decade or so ago. He described contributing to Linux as about as scary as it gets (source [External Link]).

A CoC might have helped back then and if it had, perhaps we'd have a better kernel for desktops today. (You still can - his website gives you the patch you need to compile a more responsive kernel, if you're interested).

Makes you wonder how many truly awful, terrible people contribute to the kernel to warrant this kind of reaction.

View this comment - View article - View full comments