Godot Engine continues advancing Vulkan support, adopts new Code of Conduct

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: TMMIt is however not in any way a policy that someone who expresses themselves would face consequences just for that.

I am not sure how this statement fits with the last one.

You are right, that was poor wording on my part. What I intended to say was that merely expressing an opinion will not normally result in any action being taken against someone. I guess there are consequences if that person were to later try to become a GSoC mentor.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPIf that misogynist in your project behaves just fine towards everyone in the project and the users and does a good job - what does it matter what views he holds privately?

I have never met a misogynist who was able to hide their crappy personality for long when there was a female around, but even IF they somehow could hold back in my project, I -still- don't want to work with a person who I know beyond reasonable doubt, is a douchebag. It's my right to chose who I work with. Again, you're more or less saying that voicing douchebag opinions is fine, but not wanting to be exposed to douchebags, is not. It's hypocrisy, because by doing that, you implicitly rank one side's freedom higher than the other.

There have been some truly wonderful comments in this thread.

I'm glad it hasn't devolved into a flame fest.

The GoL community is diverse, civil, and mostly tolerant. <3

Quoting: chrAnd we need to speak out about those who on our side of the argument step out of line.

Quoting: Guest@Scaine and Kimryelle, you have both taken some effort to explain us you would exclude people for what they are regardless of what they do. Or do not in that specific case.

(Not that i think you are not free to do so) :D

Well sure! The standard you walk past is the standard you accept. If I know someone is being a douche, acting in ways I despise, but I continue to work with that person, I've set the standard for that community.

That's all a CoC really is. A reflection of the type of person you want in your community.

And sure, cancel culture can make some of this stuff quite murky, but a CoC isn't going to change that happening.


Last edited by scaine on 5 November 2019 at 6:43 pm UTC

Quoting: Guest@Scaine and Kimryelle, you have both taken some effort to explain us you would exclude people for what they are regardless of what they do.

Yep. I fully support them being able to express these opinions about how they'd like the systems to work.

It also helps me know that I should avoid contributing to projects where they have positions of power.

Quoting: psymin

Quoting: Guest@Scaine and Kimryelle, you have both taken some effort to explain us you would exclude people for what they are regardless of what they do.

Yep. I fully support them being able to express these opinions about how they'd like the systems to work.

It also helps me know that I should avoid contributing to projects where they have positions of power.

So you'll avoid Godot? Because if I had a position of power in any project, I'd support using their CoC.

Quoting: scaineSo you'll avoid Godot? Because if I had a position of power in any project, I'd support using their CoC.

Quoting: psyminI should avoid contributing to projects where they have positions of power.

If you are in a position of power in the Godot community, yes, I'd avoid contributing to Godot.

I can take the CoC at face value, but when it is coupled with activism from folks in positions of power within the community it can take a very sinister turn.

I wouldn't avoid using the engine, or playing games that are created with it.

But I prefer to put my energies into communities that are welcoming of civil dissent and diversity of opinion.

I'm in support of communities having codes of conduct that accurately and publicly reflect the types of folks they want in their communities. It helps make an informed decision to avoid the community if necessary.

It is a win/win.

But, this is just a hypothetical, since I don't think you're in a position of power in Godot. If you are, please let me know so that I can steer clear, for your benefit and my own.

Thankfully, those who have commented who seem to be in positions of power within Godot seem to be expressing an ideology that is more tolerant of folks like myself than some other communities are.

<3

Quoting: psyminBut I prefer to put my energies into communities that are welcoming of civil dissent and diversity of opinion

I am not sure what part of the CoC made you think that civil dissent and diversity of opinion isn't welcome. I didn't find any of that in there. And neither scaine nor myself have said anything to that extent, either. But yes, I do really not think that racism, misogyny, sexism, homophobia and bigotry qualify as "civil dissent" by any stretch of imagination, and neither are any of these things an "opinion". Being a pathetic moron isn't an "opinion". I guess that's really the thing where we don't agree on.

Quoting: KimyrielleBut yes, I do really not think that racism, misogyny, sexism, homophobia and bigotry qualify as "civil dissent" by any stretch of imagination, and neither are any of these things an "opinion". Being a pathetic moron isn't an "opinion". I guess that's really the thing where we don't agree on.

Please share with us objective definitions of "racism", "misogyny", "sexism", and "bigotry".

Too often these terms are defined in a subjective manner.

Please note that it is quite possible to be racist against (or for) any race, including white.

Please note that it is quite possible to be sexist against (or for) any gender, including male.

If using the term "misogyny" in a document, please include "misandry" as well or the document has a gender bias.

When the terms regarding bigotry are used without a clear, public, and *objective* definition, they can (and do) create an environment where it is acceptable to discriminate against folks for their biology.

I'm in full support of denouncing bigotry in all forms.

I'm in full support of having clear codes of conduct that use objective language to describe the folks they want as part of their community.

I'm completely *against* using the terms for bigotry that focus solely on bigotry against certain genders, certain races and certain ideologies.

Bigotry is not a trait that is only held by folks who hate a specific demographic. Bigotry exists against all demographics, even the ones that are seen as the oppressors.

(Edit: It seems like you're coming awfully close to calling me a "pathetic moron". That is quite acceptable. However, in the spirit of having a productive conversation I'd like to request that we refrain from trying to insult anyone. Even if they're hypothetical.)


Last edited by psymin on 5 November 2019 at 9:27 pm UTC

Quoting: psyminPlease share with us objective definitions of "racism", "misogyny", "sexism", and "bigotry".

Too often these terms are defined in a subjective manner.

Please note that it is quite possible to be racist against (or for) any race, including white.

Please note that it is quite possible to be sexist against (or for) any gender, including male.

Please share with us an objective definition of "definition".
Language is somewhat fuzzy, yes. And indeed, all terms are ultimately defined in a (somewhat) subjective manner. Linguistic meaning is determined by usage. But I've noticed that generally nobody has that hard a time getting what they mean across and nobody worries that much about this stuff unless either
1) They have an English Literature paper due and their prof is into postmodernism, or
2) They want to evade the common meanings of something for political reasons. So suddenly if we talk about sexism or racism we get all these postmodernist, deconstructionist right wingers wanting to quibble about linguistic indeterminacy and, not generally having a background in English Literature, not doing it terribly well.

Now, the whole "well, you can be racist and sexist against white males, too, you know" thing which I hear ad nauseam. Speaking as a straight white male, I've got it made. There's all kinds of shit I don't take because of it. It takes a special kind of whiny to complain that other races and genders and orientations and whatnot getting a fair shake now and then is some kind of reverse discrimination. Still, there probably are a fair number of blacks who are resentful of white folks and have skewed views of them, et cetera et cetera. But it doesn't matter. For two basic reasons: One, the fact that people worry more about one kind of discrimination than another does not affect the typical remedy proposed--so for instance, in no code of conduct anywhere does it says "You can't say bad things about any group except white males"--rather, the approach is always to apply some general principle of equality and/or civility, which will happen to protect the poor oppressed white males even though there was no particular intent to do so. Second, because prejudice is a problem largely because it is used by those with more power to step on those with less. If those with less power get upset about that, it has little impact on those with more power doing the stepping, so there's not much reason to fear it.

Some white males like to pretend that pendulums have shifted so far, people are worrying so much about (various other groups) that now we're somehow the oppressed group, but it's the most utter patent bullshit. White guys still have the money and the power and better interest rates and less chance of getting whacked by cops and on and on and on. The utterly wimpy fear I often see displayed, of the prospect of having to operate on a level playing field with everyone else, shames me.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 5 November 2019 at 10:41 pm UTC