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

Quoting: Patola

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: Patola

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: anewsonPro 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.

QuoteExamples 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.

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Dolus

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: DolusHere, 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.

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: baccilusThat 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."

Quoting: tuubibut 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

Quoting: baccilus

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Dolus

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: DolusHere, 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

Quoting: baccilus

Quoting: tuubiYet 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.

Quoting: baccilus

Quoting: tuubibut 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.

Quoting: tuubiAnd 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.

Quoting: baccilusIs 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

Quoting: baccilus

Quoting: baccilusIs 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.

Quoting: slaapliedjeI'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.