Return to

The Linux Kernel Adopts A Code of Conduct


The creator of the coc is now looking to build a platform for projects using it to enforce it.

@Streetguru don’t forget “harassment” :smile:

I just wish it was more clearer when there is such potential final punishment.


The vague stuff will not hold up under any scrutiny. How do you prove that someone isn’t empathetic? You can’t. This is not a legal document. It’s corporate puffery. They aqre just setting a tone says to me “Act like an adult and don’t embarrass the Linux Foundation”.


I’ll donate because #istandwithcaroline


She’s raising money for this? Can’t anyone do anything without begging for money? How much of a budget do you need to hit the keyboard and post on the internet?!

I take it back. I’m done…lol


Patreon as well.

The go fund me is a classic example of just wanting to see if the momentum will raise money for themselves (in my opinion). It lacks any plan, allocation of funding, etc. You always know its a money grab when there’s zero plan or transparency.

I mean… the idea is a help desk/ticket system basically. Throw up an issue tracker and your done.


If you follow the twitter thread from Nick in the OP she’s actually a decent/good programmer? I don’t remember exactly.

But next she’ll probably claim harassment from the linux community for them victim buxs on patreon.


When I first saw this I just thought that Linus was coming to the realization that he couldn’t behave like he has been. He found this code of conduct and thought it was good enough.They don’t need someone trying to make this into a money grab. It looks unprofessional and bush league I believe he needs to drop this and have his lawyers come up with something on their own that is a little less vague. I mean what does making the Linux community better entail?

I just read the GoFundMe and I wasn’t very enthusiastic. I was reading this and being empathetic visualizing myself at the head of a open source project. My head was shaking thinking why do I need her to tell me that telling a man that he needed to be aborted for sending bad code is not acceptable.


I think part of the problem is the coc that’s being used is a political document. So having a central ‘service’ for projects to use to fight undefined harassment makes some more sense in that context in my opinion.

The person who came up with it has their own political end goal in mind and and empire to build around it. And is doing a good job, that is a lot of people who have adopted that particular coc.

A code of conduct isn’t inherently bad, but the goals have to be clear and good thought put into it.


Is it going to end up being the Bullyhunters of FOSS?


I agree. This is what happens when you don’t keep your backyard clean. Someone will come in and do it for you.


My wonder is why SAAS in the first place. A group email is good enough, does anyone really expect to have so many complaints that they need an entire service provided to manage it.


Well if you take offense to every little thing someone says or does it’ll probably fill up quick.

The requirement for empathy for example is ableist because some people are incapable of empathy.


That’s the Linux tradition. Build a Sherman tank when a speedy motorcycle will do the job:)

I’m not going to support this. I’m not one to jump on a bandwagon to enable someone’s power trip and this looks like a hell of a power trip.


Some of this is a fad, some of it is an inevitable failing of human nature that expresses itself in organizations of humans…

It is cowardice and incompetence that leads people to put up rules and point to them as some immutable set of things that must be obeyed (passive aggressive way to be the bully and claim otherwise… “it’s the rules hurting you not me.”).

“Don’t be a jerk” is a fine rule-set. When someone is a jerk, then own the leadership it takes to point it out and remove them from the group if that is required. Project an attitude that its not ok to be jerk and address individual runaway abusers of kindness as above. Kick them out not because “the rulez”, but because they are jerks and enough people agree with you that it can be accomplished.


The controversy around Contributor Convent creator Coraline Ada Ehmke

Is this is Freudian slip that I don’t understand?


Contributor Covenant is the name of the CoC linux uses now. It’s linked earlier in the thread, it’s pretty insane.


It’s mostly just shitposting and posts saying “I oppose it”. There are a minority of posts here that air the same concerns that have already been outlined in this thread. I’m curious what the discourse on LKML is like. I’d like to spend some time sifting through any topics regarding the CoC and Linus’s departure. I’m sure there HAVE to be actual contributors that are against this.

I wonder if there is anything that we could do, like reaching out to opposed maintainers to form a coalition for reforming the CoC.


Time for Linus to fork the kernel off into his own tree (as opposed to the official “Linus tree” without this garbage?


This whole thread is fuel for the CoC’s boiler room. We push back they bait we debate, they bait. Someone loses their shit, they point and bait more.

It why a hate people. Try debate with a non-rational cockroach infestation.

I dont have a crystal ball. Common sense may prevail.


Yeah the whole Github thread is just shitposing and non constructive. Useless unfortunately…

I do like to comment on the definition of harassment argument. In my opinion a CoC should not have a clear definition of harassment. And the reason is exactly the ones that people use in favor of having one. Exactly because the definition of harassment can change depending your cultural background the CoC definition needs to be vague. You cannot define what harassment is based on the a specific cultural background when you have a project that has contributors from all over the world. It is a recipe for disaster and it would actually make the CoC too restrictive.

They only way is to allow the leadership to be able to judge reports on case by case basis, based on who the actors are and thus you cannot define harassment more than the common sense examples already given and general values.

What is really missing from the covenant CoC is a clause that defines that you always assume good faith. Not just from the enforcers of the CoC but every single actor involved. Just like the Debian CoC does with its “assume good faith” clause and Django does with its “When we disagree, try to understand why” clause. You do not really have to be more concise than this.