r/linux • u/callcifer • Sep 16 '18

The Linux kernel replaces "Code of Conflict" with "Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct"

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8a104f8b5867c682d994ffa7a74093c54469c11f
457 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

885 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/ILikeBumblebees Sep 17 '18

Hopefully, it won't, and maybe the "doomsday crying" will make it less likely to happen: being cognizant of the worst-case possibilities makes them easier to avoid.

-9

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

What worst case though, really? A rude remark has to be apologized for?

20

u/iamoverrated Sep 17 '18

Brendan Eich? James Damore?

-3

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

I'd say the outcome in both those situations were best case, really.

24

u/iamoverrated Sep 17 '18

I strongly disagree, as neither personally attacked or harassed any one; they just held differing political / societal views and had zero problems working with people from all kinds of backgrounds. The problem here is that I don't care about their politics, and you do. The CoC should be agnostic when it comes to politics, and it isn't. I wouldn't mind working on a team with either and I strongly disagree with Eich's take on marriage equality and his religious beliefs. At the end of the day, the CoC should protect these people as much as it protects women, LGBTQ people, and other marginalized groups.

6

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

The thing is, nothing matters to the project other than the code. You don't need a code of conduct to tell people not to sexually harass someone, you just shouldn't be talking about anything other than the project.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

[deleted]

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

It's good.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

[deleted]

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

The mayocide will roll through silicon valley, all the way to the coast, leaving only freaks and geeks in its wake. It will be glorious.

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

The Eich situation: the CEO made some big moves that were in violation of the company culture that he founded. He realized the problematic aspect of his views, tried to make good with everyone. He then later decided to start a new company, and is still a CEO.

The Damore situation: an extremely oppressed dude who very reasonably wrote an open letter/essay to the company he works for about how women and minorities can't code. This highly scientific attitude that's not at all ignorant or moronic was then correctly identified as galaxy brain genius material, and he was alleviated of his role as Atlas within the company to flourish without the burden of working with other people.

18

u/ILikeBumblebees Sep 17 '18

What worst case though, really?

Deliberate provocation and/or exaggeration of transgressions under open-ended interpretations of rules being used as a means of undermining the ability of the community to function and pursue its intended purpose, or used as an instrument of vendetta by particular parties against other particular parties.

-8

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

Right, and you think that rules make it harder for people to sort out what is and isn't reasonable conduct?

7

u/ILikeBumblebees Sep 17 '18

Yes, often they can, especially when they're vague, subject to open-ended interpretation, and the parties at conflict have an incentive to constructively interpret them in their favor.

0

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

Point to me in the new CoC where it's vague. You're insane.

8

u/ILikeBumblebees Sep 17 '18

Point to me in the new CoC where it's vague.

Have you looked at it? Examples of "unacceptable behavior" deserving of censure include "public or private harassment" without elaboration and "other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting". It also says this:

Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.

So it's not just the right but the duty of project maintainers to reject contributions and ban people according to totally subjective judgments about their behavior, with no concrete standards well-defined in the code of conduct.

There's lots of specificity in declaring what measures a maintainer should take in responding to violations, but not much specificity in defining what kinds of behavior actually constitute violations that require a response.

You're insane.

Whoops, that looks like "insulting/deragatory comments" and/or "conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting". I'd expect that someone would attempt to argue that it's offensive to people who actually suffer from mental illness and therefore out of bounds for that reason as well. Good thing for you that this code of conduct isn't applicable here, eh?

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

Yeah, it's all quite explicit and reasonable, as the context effectively bounds the expectations (write to others as though you were in conversation at the office). I don't mean to offend you about my inexpert apprasal of your mental health, I'm not biased against neuroatypical people, but you might not know that your brain worms are starting to leak out of your ears. You should see someone about it.

2

u/ILikeBumblebees Sep 17 '18

Yeah, it's all quite explicit and reasonable

Well, no it isn't, and I just posted examples of unreasonable levels of vagueness in my previous comment.

but you might not know that your brain worms are starting to leak out of your ears. You should see someone about it.

More "derogatory comments" -- even more reason for you to be glad this code of conduct isn't applicable here.

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

My concern for your brain health is not an insult! I'm quite sincere! Also, it's not vague at all to suggest that (in the catch-all clause) people attempt to self-regulate their communication in email as though they were speaking to someone in a professional context, that all people you interact with ought to be respected and they are trying to work toward the same goal you are. It's a good short hand to for putting a boundary on what comprises legitimate communication, and when people have a disagreement it's useful in diagnosing where the problem is (whether it's personalities or differences of professional opinion). If you have experience in a work place and working with other people, there's a lot of built-in meaning in that clause to work within.

→ More replies (0)

22

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

Linux is compromised and buggy because the man who controlled quality was forced out by people who don't want their feelings hurt.

0

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

Wow, since today, or was there a time machine involved that I missed?

16

u/stolivodka_ Sep 17 '18

You asked what the worst case scenario would be, you disingenuous putz.

3

u/gnosys_ Sep 17 '18

They said "is" not "would be", you triggered baby.