Just to add some more LQ-based experience, we did have a poster here who started out male but became female at one point. I can't remember their name. Sadly, however, one poster in particular had a go at that person purely for being transgender. I tried to argue with the poster to explain how their comments were hurtful but to no avail. I have no idea whether action was taken against the poster who posted the hurtful comments.

And I say that as someone opposed to the CoC. I just feel that *everyone* needs to be treated with respect, and the transgender poster wasn't.

Edit: It was ButterflyMelissa. My role in the thread wasn't as heroic or as direct as I thought (it never is ) but you'll notice that the hurtful poster's comments are still extant on the thread. https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ml#post5521610

Forgive me, but since when did it matter what/who people were/are in coding. Produce good code or don't, produce good merchandise or don't. "These people" (and this movement), are pigeon holing themselves into a massive corner by trying to create a world opposite of what they claim. For them, race, sex, gender, status, etc... matters, and that is the problem. Most people are not going through the world living in their made up reality. Psychiatrists used to call this delusional, narcissistic, schizophrenic etc... The world is not out to get these people, yet they are hell bent on trying to "get" those not in "their" (imagined) group.

Regulating thought (through language policing) is very dangerous, far more dangerous then bad physical policing.

"for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." Thomas Jefferson.

Prof. Jordan Peterson
2017/05/13: Freedom of Speech: Not Just Another Value
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVvS3L_aBV4

4 members found this post helpful.

But do you see how they "Butterfly" made sex/gender the issue of the thread. Similar to the kernel CoC, its being made an issue and that's the issue, but look who is making it an issue.

---After re-reading this post, who's on first.....

Wow. It doesn't matter who was "on first". The post was in one of the General forums and Melissa, who started the thread, felt that she wanted to share something that was important to her with her fellow LQers. She wasn't doing anyone any harm, she was just being friendly. If you follow the thread back, we were all hanging loose and talking about nothing and everything, over and above the nominal topic. Yes, we were all pretty much off-topic. It happens from time to time.

Seriously, you're way off here. The only disrespect in that thread was created by the guy who compared her to a "thing". If you can't see that, perhaps CoCs *are* the way to go.

Sheeesh.

You misunderstood me completely and that is why the SJW Codes of Conduct/Thought/language policing are so dangerous. I did read your link from the beginning, and I remember reading it when it occurred. Yes, that person who referred to her as a thing was way out of line.

I think you should DuckDuckGO "who's on first", it was joke, I was making fun of my own post that it perhaps formed a loop.

PS: This is similar to thumbs up being positive to one culture yet derogatory to another, two fingers held up like the letter V for some means peace, others Victory, facing the wrong way it means FU. Shall we regulate all hand signs? Better throw away sign language and invent something new for deaf people.

2 members found this post helpful.

In that case I did misunderstood you, almost entirely (and it surprised me, I have to admit, that you were saying what I thought you were). And that's a good point to emerge from that - misunderstanding can be rife in a text-only environment where we all come from different cultures and speak different languages.

Yup, I know that sketch - a brilliant piece of comedy.

Right, that's it, I'm off to my kip before I cause World War III.

Catch you all again tomorrow.

1 members found this post helpful.

Peace

thanks, but i must say it's a little vague and too broad.
i'd like to clarify why i think that this particular CoC is not the way.
maybe i need to join the linux kernel mailing list... maybe it's already overflowing with outraged discussion...

i'm thinking how i can sum up what is happening here. "SJW" just doesn't sound right, it doesn't give meaning (i mean, it's not like i'm against social justice). neither does "witchhunt". for a moment i thought "Pogrom" was a better term, but that seems to be reserved for Jews and physical violence.

In the end, what some people are doing here reminds me a lot of what was going down in the former Eastern Bloc and China: people being persecuted because of saying the wrong things, because of expressing opinions that do not fully align with what those in charge say. Many of them even believed in the ideal of communism, they just weren't happy with some aspect of it, often exactly with how it was being enforced. Like now.

Let us not forget that the followers of Ehmke's politics do not wield any actual power just yet.
But they sure behave like they would want to.
And that is what I want to petition against.
That is what I do not want in the Linux kernel, or in fact any FOSS project.
Becasue using that particular CoC is a step in that direction.

3 members found this post helpful.

Did you notice what he called himself? Teufel is the German for devil. Congrats, Melissa! It's quite an achievement to get Satan himself taking pot shots at you. But I hope he's blacklisted now.

1 members found this post helpful.

Didn't notice that, hazel.

No, the poster in question is still active. I didn't post that link for a witch-hunt though, and I'm not a fan of banning anyone unless there is repeated antisocial behaviour despite the poster receiving advice to try and stop and prevent it. The debate just reminded me that we had experienced our own example of disrespect towards a transgender poster. It is these sort of experiences, or the reaction thereto, that cause pressure to introduce CoCs.

Why would that CoC change anything?
... even when all LF TAB members (the ones who need to enforce that CoC) become extreme SJWs (It's current members aren't: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/abou...cid=91k2_li1o8 )

Here's a post from Ted T'so (from all leading developers, probably the one who dislikes "extreme SJW stuff" the most -- and has been very vocal about this on lkml):
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/20/199

Edit:

Change can be scary, but it's a natural process in human evolution.
IMHO: Some people are panicking for no reason (and it's even debatable if anything changed at all).

1 members found this post helpful.

I wouldn't know the TAB if I tripped over it so am not in a position to comment on its influence, but if it has none then I wonder why it exists. Plus, if it is made up of people who "join ... because they want to serve" then it might be vulnerable to becoming what James Plamondon called a "stacked panel".

I'm not saying it has gone or will go that way, just that it could be cause for concern. Especially given the recent hoo-ha around Theo Ts'o.


Looking at the CoC itself, I would also be inclined to wonder if anything has changed, although I think the list of "will-nots" is both superfluous and a bug. I wouldn't be surprised if this all turned out to be a storm in a teacup, but at the same time, after reading some of the background I'm starting to think I can smell almonds in the tea. Hopefully, time will tell.

Exactly! In all my time using Linux and in writing/fixing software, nothing has ever made me feel like it's focused on anything other than openness and inclusion.

There have been well known openly gay people involved in free software since even before the time of Linux, they did not feel the need to shout about it, nor force their lifestyle choices, ideals or morals down others' throats.

This latest nonsense, is not the work of gay or transgender people, it is a political agenda being pushed by a certain element who claim to represent those groups as well as feminism, equal rights, racial equality, etc. An element who usually contribute very little, if anything, in terms of code to the projects they are interfering in.

Similarly, the FreeBSD project recently adopted an adapted "CoC" from the "Geek Feminism wiki".

https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html

Among others points, the "CoC" covers this kind of thing:

This kind of bilge is driven by people who are not technically adept enough to contribute meaningully, yet find other means to get involved and feel important. They are like flies around dung.

This is why I prefer politically neutral projects such as OpenBSD, which have a strong leadership, excellent code quality and none of this bollocks.

Linux has pretty much doomed itself in it's popularity - and for bringing in so many corporate sponsors/interests.

5 members found this post helpful.

This one made me laugh. I'm sure the code-of-conduct authors have written things like that while chatting online, just like everyone else.