DT Writes A Code Of Conduct DistroTube
video description
Date: 2022-03-30
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
googIesux
Right. Covering ones ass, legally, absolutely does NOT have be the same thing as bowing to ideological terror groups.
Placing policies that require people to lie in key gate-keeping points is an attempt to make sure that if you won't at least lie, and say that you're part of their religion-- that if you don't keep silent out of fear, and might speak up or even make arguments against their ideology; you won't have a job. It's about suppression.
Really they'd rather have you dead, and many will often say so very loudly. Violence is advocated (by a MS rep at a foss conference, no less) as warranted by SJWs, and they boldly admit that they see the world in terms of power and shallow grouping of otherwise individual people, and only seek power.
This SJW behavior mirrors exactly that of the actual Nazi activists. But then I'm always warning people to watch out for gate-keeping of any kind.
reply
Right. Covering ones ass, legally, absolutely does NOT have be the same thing as bowing to ideological terror groups.
Placing policies that require people to lie in key gate-keeping points is an attempt to make sure that if you won't at least lie, and say that you're part of their religion-- that if you don't keep silent out of fear, and might speak up or even make arguments against their ideology; you won't have a job. It's about suppression.
Really they'd rather have you dead, and many will often say so very loudly. Violence is advocated (by a MS rep at a foss conference, no less) as warranted by SJWs, and they boldly admit that they see the world in terms of power and shallow grouping of otherwise individual people, and only seek power.
This SJW behavior mirrors exactly that of the actual Nazi activists. But then I'm always warning people to watch out for gate-keeping of any kind.
reply
randomname
While I love your Code Of Conduct, saying we all know how to treat each other is a little bit naive? While things like the Gnome code of conduct is pretty lame and plainly wrong to apply to the FOSS communities in general, there are many industries and entities out there where the ways to climb of the ranks, unfortunately, are mostly politics and not the quality of contributions (I would not be surprised if this is the case of the Gnome foundation as how its products are still sucks while being so strict in receiving contributions), these kinds of political biased code of conducts are to fight against the political biased reality in these cases. And I'm not saying this is the way it should be, and it is obviously wrong for FOSS as most people only care about how good is your contributions, I'm just explaining why they exist in the first place.
reply
While I love your Code Of Conduct, saying we all know how to treat each other is a little bit naive? While things like the Gnome code of conduct is pretty lame and plainly wrong to apply to the FOSS communities in general, there are many industries and entities out there where the ways to climb of the ranks, unfortunately, are mostly politics and not the quality of contributions (I would not be surprised if this is the case of the Gnome foundation as how its products are still sucks while being so strict in receiving contributions), these kinds of political biased code of conducts are to fight against the political biased reality in these cases. And I'm not saying this is the way it should be, and it is obviously wrong for FOSS as most people only care about how good is your contributions, I'm just explaining why they exist in the first place.
reply
Fubar
The GNOME CoC: Holy shit. I mean...seriously? Leftists have always made at least small attempts to hide their hypocrisy, but GNOME CoC literally has a Hypocrisy Clause at the end: -Remember, this Code of Conduct exists specifically to attack straight white males, so if you are a straight white male, don't go thinking you can hold our own rules over us. We are hypocrites--we exist to attack you. So sit down and shut up.-
On CoC's in general: the open source community relies on freedom of speech to do what it does--it is our only line of defense. If you can't handle being criticized and called names, then you do not belong in the adult world, let alone the open source community.
reply
The GNOME CoC: Holy shit. I mean...seriously? Leftists have always made at least small attempts to hide their hypocrisy, but GNOME CoC literally has a Hypocrisy Clause at the end: -Remember, this Code of Conduct exists specifically to attack straight white males, so if you are a straight white male, don't go thinking you can hold our own rules over us. We are hypocrites--we exist to attack you. So sit down and shut up.-
On CoC's in general: the open source community relies on freedom of speech to do what it does--it is our only line of defense. If you can't handle being criticized and called names, then you do not belong in the adult world, let alone the open source community.
reply
Pushpak
No. COCs are necessary. People need to abide by certain rules and regulations. As to what you said that we know how to treat people, that's not how things are. You maybe a good person.That doesn't mean each and every person is. Almost every criminal (barring the mentally ill ones) know what they're doing (the crime) is wrong. But they do it anyway for their 'reasons'. If you're already respectful to everyone, you shouldn't be too worried about GNOME's COC. And stop acting like a victim all the time. You're pretty delusional. No one, trust me, no one's coming after you to rob you of your 'way of life'. Just live and let live.
reply
No. COCs are necessary. People need to abide by certain rules and regulations. As to what you said that we know how to treat people, that's not how things are. You maybe a good person.That doesn't mean each and every person is. Almost every criminal (barring the mentally ill ones) know what they're doing (the crime) is wrong. But they do it anyway for their 'reasons'. If you're already respectful to everyone, you shouldn't be too worried about GNOME's COC. And stop acting like a victim all the time. You're pretty delusional. No one, trust me, no one's coming after you to rob you of your 'way of life'. Just live and let live.
reply
Jeffrey
One change which a bow to modern language norms to to change - He - to - They - as a gender neutral generic pronoun. Sorry folks, but the old default masculine - He - is too often used as straw man to cause flamewars. A flame resistant code is the best one can hope for, given human nature. I am old school, and the Mark One code is written in classic English. This is more a polishing, like replacing -tolerance- with -acceptance. - We want a code with no foothold for the negativists, as is clear in the current version. This is mostly bug proofing, sandboxing the code against hostile examiners.
reply
One change which a bow to modern language norms to to change - He - to - They - as a gender neutral generic pronoun. Sorry folks, but the old default masculine - He - is too often used as straw man to cause flamewars. A flame resistant code is the best one can hope for, given human nature. I am old school, and the Mark One code is written in classic English. This is more a polishing, like replacing -tolerance- with -acceptance. - We want a code with no foothold for the negativists, as is clear in the current version. This is mostly bug proofing, sandboxing the code against hostile examiners.
reply
cherubin7th
I don't like the explicit list of what no to judge on. There is an infinite number of nonsense we can judge other. This COC implies it is OK to judge based on for example weight. It also enables people to rub their politics into others faces. I also don't like this acceptance thing. What if I think the other person is doing something evil? Like a Pedo or Nazi/Socialist? I agree that what happens outside the project should not have influence on the foss project, but forcing people to accept everyone? And what if this people rub their evil doing into your face inside the project?
reply
I don't like the explicit list of what no to judge on. There is an infinite number of nonsense we can judge other. This COC implies it is OK to judge based on for example weight. It also enables people to rub their politics into others faces. I also don't like this acceptance thing. What if I think the other person is doing something evil? Like a Pedo or Nazi/Socialist? I agree that what happens outside the project should not have influence on the foss project, but forcing people to accept everyone? And what if this people rub their evil doing into your face inside the project?
reply
bobpeters61
Two things:
1. The reciprocity part misquotes the normal -golden rule- almost universally considered ethical. Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you. For everyone do do to others as they believe others have done to them inevitably leads to escalation of disputes and quarrels.
2. Your invocation of the supposed infallibility of -the market- to determine the value of a person, not just of their contribution, is injection of your own neoliberal extremist political ideology.
reply
Two things:
1. The reciprocity part misquotes the normal -golden rule- almost universally considered ethical. Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you. For everyone do do to others as they believe others have done to them inevitably leads to escalation of disputes and quarrels.
2. Your invocation of the supposed infallibility of -the market- to determine the value of a person, not just of their contribution, is injection of your own neoliberal extremist political ideology.
reply
Henk
I think you got a solid foundation in this one, but i am missing a point that is not directly and only indirectly mentioned.
Which is the very simple, Assume good intentions point. Where people always assume that the other person means well and does not deliberately try to insult them etc. This alone would completely block any people from trying to abuse the system by making up false allegations given they would then be in conflict with that rule.
reply
I think you got a solid foundation in this one, but i am missing a point that is not directly and only indirectly mentioned.
Which is the very simple, Assume good intentions point. Where people always assume that the other person means well and does not deliberately try to insult them etc. This alone would completely block any people from trying to abuse the system by making up false allegations given they would then be in conflict with that rule.
reply
noam65
If only your surmise were true. People largely don't treat each other the way they'd like to be treated.
With regard to marginalized groups and that particular gnome code of conduct, I think, despite what it says, it would depend on what your complaint is. If the complaint were about criminal behavior, or a severe ethical one, it would be entertained, even if the person whom the issues is about also happens to be in one of those groups.
reply
If only your surmise were true. People largely don't treat each other the way they'd like to be treated.
With regard to marginalized groups and that particular gnome code of conduct, I think, despite what it says, it would depend on what your complaint is. If the complaint were about criminal behavior, or a severe ethical one, it would be entertained, even if the person whom the issues is about also happens to be in one of those groups.
reply
Numeria
Hi, thanks for prompting this discussion. I'm critical of some points of your perspective. Chiefly, you present yourself as idealistic and ignorant to the lived reality of people who face discrimination. Yes, if people could treat each other well then we wouldn't need to explicitly state things. It is because we have a history of discrimination, bias, and prejudice that we need to come out and say that's not okay anymore.
reply
Hi, thanks for prompting this discussion. I'm critical of some points of your perspective. Chiefly, you present yourself as idealistic and ignorant to the lived reality of people who face discrimination. Yes, if people could treat each other well then we wouldn't need to explicitly state things. It is because we have a history of discrimination, bias, and prejudice that we need to come out and say that's not okay anymore.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
