SC Controller driver and UI version 0.4.5 is out, last release for a while

Pro CoC wants to change the norms around abusive behaviour and language in the kernel dev community (which goes right up to Torvalds). Con CoC is worried this empowers moderators to exclude developers who don't share their ideological views. The former goal is laudible, and the latter concern is justified (eg Johnathan Haidt's work on academia).

This CoC simply codifies the powers Linux maintainers have had all along. The "Con CoC" crowd seem to have trouble understanding this basic fact. Could be because they'd rather just keep fighting the scary SJW cabal that keeps taking away their toys.

Nope.
Read the CoC.
It does not center on abusive behavior. It focuses on vaguely-termed abusive persons. It does not tell people not to write racist/sexist/etc. posts. It tells they can not be racist/sexist/etc. Wording is important. This potentially empowers moderators to expel people based on their own personal choices in other domains, apart from the linux kernel. This is an enormous difference.

Hmmm. Where? All the language in the Contibutor Covenant, the template CoC adopted by the Linux Foundation, focuses squarely on behaviours. There's no mention of "abusive persons" and no language that I personally find to be vague. Well, no actually there is one "catch all" phrase at the end which could be an issue: "Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting". I have no idea if the Linux Foundation left that in though.

So I'm curious how you see that this could possibly "empower moderators to expel people based on their own personal choices". The examples of behaviour are cut and dried. And there's only five of them? Read for yourself.

Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:

• The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or advances



• 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 professional setting

Seriously, have you read the right CoC, or have the Linux Foundation added a bunch of stuff that I don't know about??

EDIT: Nope, the Linux Foundation adopted the core template pretty much as is, as far as I can tell. [Read for yourself.]

You are correct.
I apologize for it and I am fixing it wherever I said that.
An explanation is warranted. At the time of the CoC, I opened a lot of tabs for the reading materials. Amongst them, many were for other CoCs. Although I can't recall which one (I am typing on my cellphone, which doesn't have the reference), it seems I confused Linux's CoC with a CoC from another project. If you still doubt my honesty on this issue, I can try and get which CoC it was after I get a hold of my main computer in about two days.

Even though it is hard to admit a mistake, I am myself relieved that this specific criticism was unwarranted. I don't want to worry more than what I already am with all these social engineering initiatives.

That was very handsomely said.

That strikes me as one of those oh-my-god-let-me-set-everyone-straight posts that has the opposite effect from what it intends. But everyone's about out of energy so it might not matter.

Here, is a little something that might blow your mind: I do not care. I do not care about a contributors sexuality, religion or political affiliation. If their contributions make Linux a better kernel, they should be allowed to contribute. That is how it should be. Instead we now have these neon haired puritans

So, not their sexuality, religion or political affiliation, but you do care about the colour of their hair.

That is about political 'leanings' as opposed to an official affiliation with any particular party. And that is perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. There really is only one group wearing the neon hair right now. And it's not the anime community anymore. And I'm a bisexual deist, btw, so you can take everything else you were trying to imply here and shove it.

I'm about done with this community. Were it not for RMS and GNU taking a stand against this CoC, I'd be done with open source/Free Software in general. This community, on the whole, has been more than happy to go about mocking people like RMS and ESR all day for their lack of social graces FOR DECADES, but, suddenly, sexist bigoted bullies (you want proof, I'll be more than happy to link you to Coraline's Twitter posts) like Coraline Ada are lionized and protected from critical comments.

A year from now Linux is going to end up JUST like FreeBSD. Half of the community is going to pack up and leave because they were accused of being everything from a Nazi (I saved a screen cap, btw) to a *phobe of every variety JUST for believing this CoC is not *just* about playing nice. And this entire thread shows that to be true.

You really are going overboard here. Calm down.
a) Coraline is in no way involved in the Linux kernel. You are bringing her into this discussion when she has nothing to do with it beyond authoring the CoC. And if that's sufficient to destroy a project, you'd best tell Google, Microsoft, Apple, and thousands of Open Source projects that apparently they shouldn't be in existence because they use the same CoC. Let me repeat this: Coraline has _no_ involvement in the decisions made about the CoC as it relates to the Linux kernel. None.
b) RMS disapproves of codes of conduct in general, but otherwise this doesn't affect him. That's all he's said. Hardly "taking a stand".
c) It's really easy to have a discussion disagreeing without stating that half the community will be accused of being a Nazi (and actually, looking back, I don't think you were - but I do see how you might have felt that way). It's not about disagreeing that a few are having problems about with your comments - it's the way you're coming across (hint: not as reasonable). You're own words are aggressive. This will only result in people being aggressive back to you, and you don't then have the right to complain about it. Calm down, at least try be more reasoned, see where it gets you. Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you here.

Is there anything in the world that can convince you that this CoC has hidden agendas? What if people start getting called Nazis, racist, *phobes at the drop of a hat, and suffering on that account?
This CoC is wrapped in a noble wrapper of inclusiveness and diversity, and people who are supporting it without being SJW themselves, just refuse to unwrap it to see whats inside. Supporting this CoC seems like the virtuous thing to do. By defending it, one can feel good about oneself.

That is why the burden of proof lies with the one making an accusation. A vague CoC does away with that.

Yet even a vague CoC gives some definition as to what actually is an offence that warrants action and who gets to decide on the verdict. Without a written document, it's all arbitrary. Naturally there needs to be proof of said offence, but that and witnesses are usually easy to provide in these cases. It's the Internet after all.

And please, remember that project management and criminal justice are two very different things. Not being allowed to contribute to a volunteer open source project isn't exactly a death sentence. It might hurt your career of course if your contributions are on behalf of your employer, but there's a simple solution: Treat others with respect and don't be a dick.

Problem is not "a written document". Problem is "this written document."

but there's a simple solution: Treat others with respect and don't be a dick.

Behaviour which is respectful in your opinion may be dicklike for someone else. What if the other person turns around makes a complaint against you for that? Would you like the hassle of clearing your name every time you utter a word? If you think this example is far fetched, let me tell you that it is not.


Last edited by baccilus on 27 September 2018 at 5:35 am UTC

Here, is a little something that might blow your mind: I do not care. I do not care about a contributors sexuality, religion or political affiliation. If their contributions make Linux a better kernel, they should be allowed to contribute. That is how it should be. Instead we now have these neon haired puritans

So, not their sexuality, religion or political affiliation, but you do care about the colour of their hair.

That is about political 'leanings' as opposed to an official affiliation with any particular party. And that is perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. There really is only one group wearing the neon hair right now. And it's not the anime community anymore. And I'm a bisexual deist, btw, so you can take everything else you were trying to imply here and shove it.

I'm about done with this community. Were it not for RMS and GNU taking a stand against this CoC, I'd be done with open source/Free Software in general. This community, on the whole, has been more than happy to go about mocking people like RMS and ESR all day for their lack of social graces FOR DECADES, but, suddenly, sexist bigoted bullies (you want proof, I'll be more than happy to link you to Coraline's Twitter posts) like Coraline Ada are lionized and protected from critical comments.

A year from now Linux is going to end up JUST like FreeBSD. Half of the community is going to pack up and leave because they were accused of being everything from a Nazi (I saved a screen cap, btw) to a *phobe of every variety JUST for believing this CoC is not *just* about playing nice. And this entire thread shows that to be true.

You really are going overboard here. Calm down.
a) Coraline is in no way involved in the Linux kernel. You are bringing her into this discussion when she has nothing to do with it beyond authoring the CoC. And if that's sufficient to destroy a project, you'd best tell Google, Microsoft, Apple, and thousands of Open Source projects that apparently they shouldn't be in existence because they use the same CoC. Let me repeat this: Coraline has _no_ involvement in the decisions made about the CoC as it relates to the Linux kernel. None.
b) RMS disapproves of codes of conduct in general, but otherwise this doesn't affect him. That's all he's said. Hardly "taking a stand".
c) It's really easy to have a discussion disagreeing without stating that half the community will be accused of being a Nazi (and actually, looking back, I don't think you were - but I do see how you might have felt that way). It's not about disagreeing that a few are having problems about with your comments - it's the way you're coming across (hint: not as reasonable). You're own words are aggressive. This will only result in people being aggressive back to you, and you don't then have the right to complain about it. Calm down, at least try be more reasoned, see where it gets you. Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you here.

Is there anything in the world that can convince you that this CoC has hidden agendas? What if people start getting called Nazis, racist, *phobes at the drop of a hat, and suffering on that account?
This CoC is wrapped in a noble wrapper of inclusiveness and diversity, and people who are supporting it without being SJW themselves, just refuse to unwrap it to see whats inside. Supporting this CoC seems like the virtuous thing to do. By defending it, one can feel good about oneself.

This specific CoC is in use by over forty thousand projects, including nearly every part of what you'd call your desktop. It's had four and a half years to develop.

So what makes you think that it will all go to hell in this one specific instance? What's unique about the kernel that this will suddenly result in people being named Nazis??

edit: spelling


Last edited by scaine on 27 September 2018 at 7:32 am UTC

Yet even a vague CoC gives some definition as to what actually is an offence that warrants action and who gets to decide on the verdict. Without a written document, it's all arbitrary.

Problem is not "a written document". Problem is "this written document."

This document is better than no document. It would be too vague to base a criminal justice system on, but it serves its purpose as a guideline for an open source project just fine.

but there's a simple solution: Treat others with respect and don't be a dick.

Behaviour which is respectful in your opinion may be dicklike for someone else. What if the other person turns around makes a complaint against you for that? Would you like the hassle of clearing your name every time you utter a word? If you think this example is far fetched, let me tell you that it is not.

And how often does that happen to you? My social skills aren't great, and I've had to apologize after some of my worst jokes to my friends on occasion, but I've always deserved the backlash. Still, I don't remember any occasion where I had to "clear my name" because of something I did on the Internet. So no, I don't get your doomsday mentality. Not that this has anything to do with the CoC of the Linux kernel.

And how often does that happen to you? My social skills aren't great, and I've had to apologize after some of my worst jokes to my friends on occasion, but I've always deserved the backlash. Still, I don't remember any occasion where I had to "clear my name" because of something I did on the Internet. So no, I don't get your doomsday mentality. Not that this has anything to do with the CoC of the Linux kernel.

Is there anything in the world that can convince you that this CoC has hidden agendas?

No


Last edited by baccilus on 27 September 2018 at 4:07 pm UTC

Is there anything in the world that can convince you that this CoC has hidden agendas?

No

I'll pretend that wasn't an attempt at sarcasm and answer: Sure there is. Or could be. Evidence would go a long way. So far we've seen nothing but heated speculation and dire predictions. On the other hand we've got thousands of projects that somehow failed to implode after adopting the same CoC.

I agree that the author of the template document obviously has a personal agenda of inclusiveness, and it's not hidden in any way. You're building them up to be an evil mastermind, when they're simply an activist who happened to write a set of guidelines for contributor conduct that was widely embraced by a whole bunch of software communities of their own free will. A tiny fraction of community members disagree (I assume) because they feel like they shouldn't be required to be respectful to people they don't like, regardless of context, and a larger minority disagrees for... various reasons that don't make much sense to me.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

I decide to stop my open source development if the kernel CoC would not come into place due to warriors against social justice. What now? Welcome to the real world, including real people, where you cannot do anything without pissing somebody off.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

He paused development to make a statement. The price of progress I guess. Maybe he'll come around when this storm in a teacup blows over.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

He paused development to make a statement. The price of progress I guess. Maybe he'll come around when this storm in a teacup blows over.

I find it sad that it's come down to this. Like during a war, I can see protestors. But when people are like 'I want you to respect that I don't want to be identified as a male or female'? It's like being okay with watching a child burn themselves and then they say "I want to burn myself, just accept me for burning myself, I identify as a burner." You still want to take the lighters away...

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

He paused development to make a statement. The price of progress I guess. Maybe he'll come around when this storm in a teacup blows over.

I find it sad that it's come down to this. Like during a war, I can see protestors. But when people are like 'I want you to respect that I don't want to be identified as a male or female'? It's like being okay with watching a child burn themselves and then they say "I want to burn myself, just accept me for burning myself, I identify as a burner." You still want to take the lighters away...

Wait, what? WTF difference does it make?! Someone wants to call themselves a girl or a boy or neither or whatever . . . either they know more about themselves than you know about them (seems quite likely), or they don't--but even if they don't, who gives a shit? Burning themselves my ass, how the hell does what gender role they're rocking do any harm? Sure, I'd want people to be pretty damn sure what they're getting into before they go for surgery that's awfully hard to reverse, but how they identify . . . whatever.

And like, we can call people by the internet handle they choose (even though it's totally not their name and may not even be a reference to a human being), and if they decide to change it we call them by the new version. One of the more respected people around the Linux gaming scene calls himself a piece of cheese, nobody bats an eye. What makes a pronoun such a big hairy deal? Hell, most of the people on the internet we don't even know what gender they biologically are, we just use whatever pronoun seems to apply or whatever one they specify if it comes up. So like, people identifying as this or that doesn't even change the process any.

This kind of stuff is just rationalizing. The bottom line here is a discomfort with people thinking a different way from you, not a concern for the person in question.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

He paused development to make a statement. The price of progress I guess. Maybe he'll come around when this storm in a teacup blows over.

I find it sad that it's come down to this. Like during a war, I can see protestors. But when people are like 'I want you to respect that I don't want to be identified as a male or female'? It's like being okay with watching a child burn themselves and then they say "I want to burn myself, just accept me for burning myself, I identify as a burner." You still want to take the lighters away...

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

Man, this complete lack of understanding of the CoC is depressing. The FUD, like this, well, it's just very difficult to keep dealing with.

So. The CoC says NOTHING about having to respect someone for having different gender identity. It says respect their contribution and be inclusive REGARDLESS of their gender identity (as one example). And as for the insulting comparison of having a gender identity being compared to a clueless child burning themselves? Yeah, I'm not even going to respond to that. And you want to take their lighters away, do you? What does that even mean? You want to "fix" people with a different gender identity to you? Jesus.

Since you don't appear to have read it - here it again: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct

But why bother? The detractors, at this point, aren't even pretending to have read it. Just pure, unfiltered FUD. Next time one of you wants to extrapolate some conspiracy theory about why you, personally, don't like this CoC, at least have the guts to actually quote where you see the CoC tripping you up.

And if you're right? Great - let the Linux Foundation know. Submit a request into the Git repo and actually do something about it, instead of spreading FUD like this.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it.

This just this . I'm sorry to all the nay sayers and doomsday announcers but it's been a solid 23 pages now and none of you have brought on the table any valid arguments wahtsoever. Heck even the REAL subject of the news isn't discussed because "oh my god a CoC has been adopted" ...
A CoC that need I remind you has been adopted by a ton of other software and hardware project leaders companies and fundations and have received the same critcisms from the people it's supposed to defend and yet the people that are supposedly defended and empowered by it keep on repeating that it's wording is too vague for its own good but that on the other end the paranoia surrounding having a code of conduct needs to stop.

How in the entire hell is "the agenda" hidden here . Looks like an open conversation to me and not just at the Linux fundation level but at Microsoft Headquarters , at Google Headquarters, at Apple headquarters , heck even at Thyssenkrupp (yep even the software branch of a metalurgy group known to develop its own software for its own puprposes adopted that template some few years back (in 2013 to be precise ) ... and I sure as all fuck don't see Thysenkrupp going down the drain ... heck if anything their division that speciliazes in elevators is giving their days of old rival OTIS a run for their money lately ... )

So with all that in mind given that we are the very first ones to critize it in the first place and that the conversation has been fairly opened about just about everywhere can FINALLY stop the conspiracy talk yes or no ????


Last edited by TheSyldat on 27 September 2018 at 11:01 pm UTC

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

Apparently there's one thing we can agree on. It is a really silly thing to be paranoid about, and merits some self-analysis on the part of the sufferer.

My suggestion: Let's adopt Finnish as the official language of the Internet. We have no gendered pronouns to trigger this preposterous phobia.


I'll pretend you didn't write the rest of your post because it's simply too sad to contemplate.

I'm not sure how the agenda is hidden, it's pretty plain. When contributors, even of software that isn't directly part of the source code (like the SC controller that just integrates with the kernel) decide to stop developing because of it, it's already caused damage. Whether intentional or not.

He paused development to make a statement. The price of progress I guess. Maybe he'll come around when this storm in a teacup blows over.

I find it sad that it's come down to this. Like during a war, I can see protestors. But when people are like 'I want you to respect that I don't want to be identified as a male or female'? It's like being okay with watching a child burn themselves and then they say "I want to burn myself, just accept me for burning myself, I identify as a burner." You still want to take the lighters away...

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

Man, this complete lack of understanding of the CoC is depressing. The FUD, like this, well, it's just very difficult to keep dealing with.

So. The CoC says NOTHING about having to respect someone for having different gender identity. It says respect their contribution and be inclusive REGARDLESS of their gender identity (as one example). And as for the insulting comparison of having a gender identity being compared to a clueless child burning themselves? Yeah, I'm not even going to respond to that. And you want to take their lighters away, do you? What does that even mean? You want to "fix" people with a different gender identity to you? Jesus.

Since you don't appear to have read it - here it again: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct

But why bother? The detractors, at this point, aren't even pretending to have read it. Just pure, unfiltered FUD. Next time one of you wants to extrapolate some conspiracy theory about why you, personally, don't like this CoC, at least have the guts to actually quote where you see the CoC tripping you up.

And if you're right? Great - let the Linux Foundation know. Submit a request into the Git repo and actually do something about it, instead of spreading FUD like this.

I actually wasn't talking about the CoC. I was referring to people who are trying to push things like the CoC onto everything.

Clearly my analogy failed. No, the lighter in this would be the stamping on others because we don't feel like referring to people as cheese. For code contributors I don't give a damn if you are an antelope, just if the code is good. That is why people are upset about this. The identity of the contributor should not matter at all, only code quality. If in 'the real world' you want to dress up as Winnie the Poo and get whipped, cool, go for it, but you don't need to describe that in a mailing list about kernel development because no one cares. When some code gets rejected and someone cries bigot, how is that fair to anyone if the code then gets accepted just to prevent someone's feelings getting hurt.

This should be like separating church and stare, except it is separating Code and Social standing.

Maybe that is clearer? Also the identity thing is messing with language. Think of Spanish for example. Amigo, Amiga and... what? Shall we start with Amigoa?

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

Apparently there's one thing we can agree on. It is a really silly thing to be paranoid about, and merits some self-analysis on the part of the sufferer.

My suggestion: Let's adopt Finnish as the official language of the Internet. We have no gendered pronouns to trigger this preposterous phobia.


I'll pretend you didn't write the rest of your post because it's simply too sad to contemplate.

I can agree on adopting Finnish, English kind of sucks.

For the rest of what I wrote... I have dealt with overly religious people all my life, and have multiple family members with mental illness. One of which at one point thought he was Jesus and at another that he was going to invent a water powered engine. A comment that five pieces of chicken on a plate meant that five people were going to die that night....

I have also been friends with MANY people who have had identity crises throughout their lives, but that usually results in people not knowing what to do for a living, not what even the most basic thing we are by our very chromosomes. This to me means we are at a strange point in our civilization / evolution where people are 'allowed' to contemplate such things.

Before anyone says I am evil, let me explain (which will help explain my previous post).

In previous eras there was always some huge calamity, war, depression, plague, etc. The mere survival of humankind or at least groups of it, would not allow people to even really have time to think if they should be a man or a woman or a they. We now live in a time where there really is no war to protest, homosexuals are widely accepted, and for the most part things are going pretty well for the first time in the world for a decade.

There is always going to be a group of people that are outraged about something, whether they are justified or not. I recall some gay people a while back comparing their hardships to black people, and I thought that ridiculous. Now this outcry from non-binaries feels similar, with outcries of being repressed or not accepted. If people are not accepting them in social circles, why do they feel that github is a social circle and that Codes of Conduct must be pushed on everyone?

When it would be easier in a digital community to have a 'vote off the island' system for when they are being a dick. If this truly was a 'don't be a dick' document, then I think everyone can agree to it, if someone was potentially being a dick, they should be called out on it, and most likely they will stop and try a bit harder to be nondickish.

Vaguery helps no one, if everyone labels a person a dick they can then vote them out.

Actual community syle.

(The burning child analogy was meant to point out some people egg on being insulted / abused because they like it. If they keep insisting to be called something (outside of say having an alias online, like "my name is maple_syrup, but I identify as unicorn horn, so call me that..." yeah, I am going to call you maple_syrup because I can always copy/paste the name.))

And that last comment of yours is totally not trolling ...
Seriously just read yourself back here . Kindly "an evil non binary" ...

Being paranoid because you might use the wrong pronoun to address someone is rather kind of silly once you think about it...

Apparently there's one thing we can agree on. It is a really silly thing to be paranoid about, and merits some self-analysis on the part of the sufferer.

My suggestion: Let's adopt Finnish as the official language of the Internet. We have no gendered pronouns to trigger this preposterous phobia.


I'll pretend you didn't write the rest of your post because it's simply too sad to contemplate.

I can agree on adopting Finnish, English kind of sucks.

For the rest of what I wrote... I have dealt with overly religious people all my life, and have multiple family members with mental illness. One of which at one point thought he was Jesus and at another that he was going to invent a water powered engine. A comment that five pieces of chicken on a plate meant that five people were going to die that night....

I have also been friends with MANY people who have had identity crises throughout their lives, but that usually results in people not knowing what to do for a living, not what even the most basic thing we are by our very chromosomes. This to me means we are at a strange point in our civilization / evolution where people are 'allowed' to contemplate such things.

Before anyone says I am evil, let me explain (which will help explain my previous post).

In previous eras there was always some huge calamity, war, depression, plague, etc. The mere survival of humankind or at least groups of it, would not allow people to even really have time to think if they should be a man or a woman or a they. We now live in a time where there really is no war to protest, homosexuals are widely accepted, and for the most part things are going pretty well for the first time in the world for a decade.

There is always going to be a group of people that are outraged about something, whether they are justified or not. I recall some gay people a while back comparing their hardships to black people, and I thought that ridiculous. Now this outcry from non-binaries feels similar, with outcries of being repressed or not accepted. If people are not accepting them in social circles, why do they feel that github is a social circle and that Codes of Conduct must be pushed on everyone?

When it would be easier in a digital community to have a 'vote off the island' system for when they are being a dick. If this truly was a 'don't be a dick' document, then I think everyone can agree to it, if someone was potentially being a dick, they should be called out on it, and most likely they will stop and try a bit harder to be nondickish.

Vaguery helps no one, if everyone labels a person a dick they can then vote them out.

Actual community syle.

(The burning child analogy was meant to point out some people egg on being insulted / abused because they like it. If they keep insisting to be called something (outside of say having an alias online, like "my name is maple_syrup, but I identify as unicorn horn, so call me that..." yeah, I am going to call you maple_syrup because I can always copy/paste the name.))

You are bad at analogies but I get your point. They overreact because it works. They mislabel those they don't like and from then point onward, they believe their own words. e.g., if they call someone Nazi, from that point onward, they will only tallk about the dangers of Nazism. They will not define what being a nazi is and if the person they called a nazi can be called one.
One more important change that occurs when this ideology percolates an organization is that people loose the concept of degrees of badness. e.g., catcalling is equated with all kinds of assaults. Saying something hurtful can be compared with causing physical harm. And so there are no degrees of punishments either.


Last edited by baccilus on 28 September 2018 at 6:45 am UTC