[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       enlightenment-users
Subject:    Re: [e-users] [E-devel] user community guidelines (please reply to ALL)
From:       Tom Hacohen <tom () osg ! samsung ! com>
Date:       2015-06-23 9:33:02
Message-ID: 558927CE.4090207 () osg ! samsung ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 23/06/15 02:32, Michael Jennings wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Tom Hacohen <tom@osg.samsung.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't think fake fluff and walking on eggshells around everyone are
>> productive or beneficial. It takes me much more time to second guess
>> every word I write and carefully word everything, where the information
>> conveyed and the intent end up being exactly the same. I honestly think,
>> that like you said, the problem is with the people getting insulted.
>> When I talk to people, unless I know them very well, I try to give them
>> the benefit of the doubt. This works great for me, I have no memory of
>> ever being railed up by anyone who hasn't explicitly and undoubtedly
>> tried to offend me and go personal.
>
> The so-called "fluff" is only "fake" if one fails to actually care
> about people's feelings.  Blaming the victim, and putting the onus on
> the abused to respond differently rather than addressing one's own
> abusive behavior, is itself further abuse.  If a person is hurting
> people's feelings with their words and causing others to feel badly
> about themselves, THAT PERSON is the problem, and the solution is that
> person changing THEMSELVES, not everyone else making excuses for them
> and saying, "Well that's just so-and-so.  He's an ass."  Expecting
> everyone else to change to accommodate one's own personal failings is
> selfish, narcissistic, and just plain wrong.

This is not at all what I meant. Raster clarified it a bit, but I'd like 
to clarify it too so it's clear. I wasn't talking "Hey dumb fuck, stop 
making shit code." this is obviously mean, personal and bad. I was 
talking about not giving criticism on code because I know that person 
might get insulted if I say the code is not good. Another issue, which 
is what I was actually talking about, is the fluff people sometimes use 
to be nice. For example instead of saying: "I think this is not the best 
solution, please try X instead." many people will write essays about the 
problem. This is fluff, and it's bad for communication.
To clarify the "fake" part: I was referring to having fluff as part of 
the code of conduct. Forcing people to say things by a code of conduct 
is fake. Think for example if we had to start emails by saying "this 
piece of code is great, I just have a few comments" just to be nice, 
although we think that code and patch are absolute shit... That's fake 
fluff. :)

Some people choose to get insulted over nothing. The problem is not 
always with the insulter. I was never talking about abusive behaviour, 
that is a major part of the guidelines and I want it there (don't be mean).

>
> So what if it takes you more time to choose your words carefully?
> That's time well spent if it saves others from having to endure the
> sting of cyberbullying.

As said above, I don't consider: "I think is not going to work, please 
change this patch" as cyberbullying, and I don't see how burying it 
inside a stack of words will help. Again, I'm not talking about people 
being abusive, I'm talking about non-abusive people being pegged as 
abusive because people are overly sensitive. It's that choice of words 
that is time consuming.

>
> I can say these things because I used to be the resident asshole of
> this community.  I used to be the one who was insulting, abusive, and
> downright mean.  I set a really shitty example, and I'm not proud of
> who I used to be.  But I've grown up now.  And I encourage anyone else
> who might be treating others badly to do the same.  If I can do it,
> anyone can.
>
> I think E very much needs a Code of Conduct, and its contents should
> be considered carefully if its purpose is to make sure people are
> treated fairly, particularly women and other under-represented
> minorities, within the community.  The Enlightenment project, despite
> its name, has not been very enlightened over the years in the way it
> has dealt with people who aren't straight white men, and that has
> undoubtedly cost us contributors.  (Yes, I know I bear a rather large
> amount of responsibility for that.  And that makes me very sad.)  Much
> of the reason has to do with our long-held tradition of harsh
> criticism and verbal abuse in the face of perceived "stupidity" (which
> was in most cases, and continues to be, more about ignorance, apathy,
> and/or error).  Even being blunt and harsh with people who claim they
> can handle it, or might even prefer it, may still scare off potential
> timid contributors.  Everyone making the effort to treat each other
> better will pay off handsomely in the long run!

Speculations. A good example of what's not in the guidelines but could 
have been is foul language. We risk insulting people who don't like 
seeing swear words as contributors, so maybe we should include that in 
the code of conduct... However, on the opposite side of the coin, there 
are the things that the existing (not the potential future) community 
values, which is being able to express ourselves freely and make jokes. 
That being said, I call people out when they are abusive to minorities. 
Not when they make jokes about them, but when they are abusive. If 
someone I know that is not an asshole says to me on IRC: "Of course Tom 
deals with twitter, the jews have always ruled the media :P" and it's in 
context, I shouldn't get insulted and that's not abuse. However if 
someone says "Hey woman, stay quiet, let the big boys talk" in the 
middle of a discussion, that's abusive and I'll call it out. Sure, a 
strong woman will be able to deal with that comment, but I think the 
threshold of being able to deal with it is too high, and it's just not 
part of who we are. I've always been a champion of minorities and woman 
in tech, just not silencing everyone for our (minorities) benefit.

>
> In the interest of improvement, I offer this:
> http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Code_of_conduct_evaluations  I
> think it offers some valuable insights into what might be missing from
> the current version as well as some alternatives from other projects
> that have proven successful and effective.

They have sexist jokes there as an example. I disagree. See above. Jokes 
about minorities can be funny and fine. As long as they are not abusive, 
done in good spirit and not only about just one minority.

>
> It might also be educational for the men in the community to read this
> list of reasons why women don't tend to contribute to Wikipedia --
> many of their reasons resonate in the open source world as well!
> http://suegardner.org/2011/02/19/nine-reasons-why-women-dont-edit-wikipedia-in-their-own-words/

I'll have a look, thanks.

--
Tom.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager!
OpManager is web-based network management software that monitors 
network devices and physical & virtual servers, alerts via email & sms 
for fault. Monitor 25 devices for free with no restriction. Download now
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/292181274;119417398;o
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-users mailing list
enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]