Messages in this thread | | | From | NeilBrown <> | Date | Sat, 27 Oct 2018 09:40:13 +1100 | Subject | Re: Call to Action Re: [PATCH 0/7] Code of Conduct: Fix some wording, and add an interpretation document |
| |
On Fri, Oct 26 2018, Rainer Fiebig wrote:
> NeilBrown schrieb: >> On Thu, Oct 25 2018, Rainer Fiebig wrote: >> >>> Am Montag, 22. Oktober 2018, 08:20:11 schrieb NeilBrown: >>>> On Sat, Oct 20 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> As everyone knows by now, we added a new Code of Conduct to the kernel >>>>> tree a few weeks ago. >>>> >>>> I wanted to stay detached from all this, but as remaining (publicly) >>>> silent might be seen (publicly) as acquiescing, I hereby declare that: >>>> I reject, as illegitimate, this Code and the process by >>>> which it is being "developed". >>>> >>>> It is clear from the surrounding discussions that this is well outside our >>>> core competencies. It will be flawed, it isn't what we need. >>>> >>>> I call on any other community members who reject this process to say so, >>>> not to remain silent. >>>> #Iobject >>>> >>>> We don't need a "Code of Conduct" nearly as much as we need "Leadership >>>> in conduct". Without the leadership, any code looks like a joke. >>>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> I call on you, Greg: >>>> - to abandon this divisive attempt to impose a "Code of Conduct" >>>> - to revert 8a104f8b5867c68 >>> >>> Yes but this seems increasingly unlikely now. However, there may be an >>> alternative. >>> >>> Jugding by the release-message for 4.19, some people here are fans of >>> Monty Python's. No wonder - as those guys are famous for being unrelenting >>> supporters of Political Correctness. >>> >>> So one would be on the safe side if one just supplemented "Our Pledge" >>> with this: >>> >>> "Everybody has the right to be offended." >>> >>> I think, John Cleese would also welcome this.[1] >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> I do think that giving certain rights to the community is a good thing: >> - the right to tell anyone that their speech is hurtful >> - the right to (patch) review by a third party. >> >> I don't think the right to be offended really needs to be given. >> Yes, I know it is a joke and I do like Monty Python. I just don't think >> it is particular helpful in this context. Maybe I missed something. > > Of course it's a joke and iirc it was indeed John Cleese who made it. But he > made it for a reason, out of concern. It has a serious core. > > The question is: what *is* helpful in this matter? > > Just saying "this is not helpful" isn't helpful either. It's a well-known > killer-phrase that has been used ad nauseam in this discussion. But an > alternative is never given. And thus it's just an other way of saying > "Eat it. And shut tf up!"
You asked me what I thought, and I told you what I thought. If you think differently, you are quite welcome tell us - to explain the way in which you think the addition would be helpful.
> > Not even *constructive* criticism is helpful. AFAIK I'm the only one here who > came up with a *complete* alternative - ignored. Others provided patches for > certain sections - ignored. Data that indicate that this may be detrimental to > Linux - ignored. Almost anything that was provided by me or others - ignored.
From my perspective, providing a complete alternative is no better than what Greg did - provided a "complete" "code of conduct".
Engage in discussion, present your case, make me *want* to read your document because you've shown me how it relates to me.
> > What kind of community or attitude is this? This feels more like "The Wall" or > North Korea than an Open-Source-project. > > And what beat everything was to misuse famously politically *in*correct Monty > Python to malign criticism of this Political-Correctness-monster. The > "People's Front" - message will forever be a prominent exhibit in "Monty > Python's Hall of Shame". And the author should be banned from laughing about > MP-sketches until he recants. Perhaps one should also report this incident to > the "Ministry of Silly CoCs". ;) > >> For myself, I relinquish my right to be offended. I just don't do it. >> It doesn't seem to be worth the effort. > > I don't. John Cleese is a smart guy. And he has a point. > > > OK, thanks for your reply! But I think it's time for me to move on. "Cut your > losses", as they say. >
Thanks for participating!
NeilBrown
> > Good luck and regards! > > Rainer Fiebig [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |