i saw someone say somewhere linux C o Conduct should simply be “don’t insert malicious code.”
i’m going to break the new CoC down. to show why it’s a terribly worded document ripe for abuse.
"+* Using welcoming and inclusive language
+* Being respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences
+* Gracefully accepting constructive criticism
+* Focusing on what is best for the community
+* Showing empathy towards other community members
+Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:
+* The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or
+* Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
+* Public or private harassment
+* Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
address, without explicit permission
+* Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
using welcoming and inclusive language. what is welcoming and inclusive language? what happens if i don’t go out of my way to be overly friendly and babying to someone who doesn’t like me?
being respectful of differing viewpoints. same as 1. what counts as being respectful? does it mean never saying you disagree with someone on something in spite of it being better to sometimes inform people that you agree? does it mean you give leeway to people with bad code simply because they have certain views? this very well could destroy a meritocracy which produces the best product for every user regardless of their views and experiences.
gracefully accepting constructive criticism. sounds great but who’s opinion of constructive? are certain individuals now required to essentially fix code for people, then write them a tutorial showing them how to fix their own code specifically so the work involved gets more than doubled?
might sound crazy but less mature people in the art world often freak the heck out even with constructive criticism claiming certain things aren’t helpful and even hateful. if it’s not helpful then it’s not constructive rather than just critical.
focusing on what is best for the community. who gets to decide what’s best? is always choosing the best code best? or is picking worse code from someone of some sort minority group best? some people think meritocracy is toxic. others think judging a person’s code by skin color or sexuality rather than pure merit of the code is toxic.
showing empathy towards other community members. same as number 1 isn’t it? if i don’t go out of my way to baby and coddle someone who doesn’t like me rather than just treating them like everyone else does it count as being empathetic to them? am i supposed to pretend i care about things i don’t care about simply to show empathy? if someone needs constructive criticism but they’ve got a fragile ego is it empathetic or overly harsh to give them criticism?
all in all the simple reading of the “do this” portion seems harmless until you think about it. it’s vastly opinion based with no clear line drawn. to a reasonable person it seems okay. the problem is that certain groups of people can be very unreasonable.
on to the “don’t do this” side
The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or advances. who gets to say if it’s sexualized?
just the wording insinuates that anything that has been used somewhat for innuendo is off limits. does calling well written code sexy break the rules?
if someone claims you were overzealously trying to help them because they were female even though you don’t give a crap and assume everyone on the internet is male or a male pretending to be female and as such you are just trying to be welcoming, inclusive, and showing some empathy are you in violation of this or are you in line with those parts of the “do this” portion?
Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks.
what counts as an attack or insulting? do they realize how many people get called trolls simply for disagreeing these days? some people take disagreement as a personal attack. in a world filled with microaggressions it’s very easy to accidentally say something that isn’t supposed to be insulting but is said to be.
certainly being a douche isn’t a good quality but there’s a difference many people may not see between being a douche and simply not being friendly to people who aren’t your friends. after all this combined with the “be empathetic” bit can be used to “demonstrate” that you’re in actuality hostile towards others because you weren’t overly friendly or as friendly as you were with others you’ve interacted with for a while and somewhat enjoy interacting with.
Public or private harassment.
you now have to eventually agree with things you disagree with or else your string of constant disagreements and constructive criticism of poor code is harassment and simply because you don’t like said person. especially true if you voiced your opinion that isn’t popular with a certain demographic somewhere else regardless as to if you had this specific individual in mind or not or even knew they were part of that demographic.
Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic
address, without explicit permission.
doxxing is bad. that’s true enough.
also be careful who you call by name. even if it’s a friend someone unrelated may report you for it.
don’t share the emails of people who may be relevant to contact.
Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
what sort of profession? construction workers use foul language all the time and they’re considered professionals. not considering them professional is insulting and derogatory towards construction workers. this is so vague it can be used as a catch all most likely in the exact opposite way i just did. what’s inappropriate in a “professional” setting changes with every professional setting even in a single profession. some people may consider decorating your cubicle with a bit of personality and things you like unprofessional… especially when it’s things they don’t like.
i think this side of things is like the other side okay if you’re dealing with all reasonable people. again though, there are certain groups of people who are not reasonable. they do what they can to instate vague opinion based crap like this specifically to give themselves more power over people they don’t agree with to oust opposition to their opinions and views.
this document has little means to make things better overall and quite a bit of power to make things worse. mature people are unlikely to to use this against anyone but any accident they make if they’re being targeted for whatever reason (likely simply because they’re not a perceived member of a certain group or they are perceived to be a member of some other group) is going to be used against them. it will slowly weed out the mature reasonable members of the group who can reasonably and fairly treat people they disagree with and give more power to the people who abuse these vague rules in order to gain power in a certain place. once they gain more power they use it to force out anyone they disagree with for any reason.
i’ve got quite a bit of experience dealing with SJWs. my sister is one of them. things she might happily take as a joke one day she will suddenly react horribly to on another. it’s like running through a mine field. you never know what will or won’t set them off and the slightest drop of a hat in the wrong direction makes you the worst person on the planet who should be ashamed to exist.
it’s why SJWs often eat their own and these very standard SJW rules are also why so many people hate SJWs.
the rules are paraded as a means to make things better but they never do. they only ever get abused as a way to force out certain people or groups while giving power to other groups… usually groups who are far less likely to treat people they disagree with equally. groups who promote worse options over better options presented by someone they don’t like.
they may be trying to make things better but they only make things worse and drag down anything they sink their claws into slowly eroding it over time.
it is 100% a self destructive ideology of intolerance telling you it’s all in the name of tolerance and empathy.