Good luck finding one. The CoC is a solution in search of a problem. Mark
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 10:32 AM Scott Harwell via Emc-users < [email protected]> wrote: > I'm a little slow on some of this. Could someone give me an example of a > "rules violation" please refer to an actual post. I read every email and > every recent topic post. In my unenlightened position I can't think of > anything in the last year that I have seen that was offensive. > > Scott H > > > On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 4:38:08 AM CDT, Valerio Bellizzomi < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I am making a big effort to understand why people is so adverse to > rules. Every project on sourceforge/github has to follow rules of the > site, and some projects have their own CoC. > If you agreed to behave correctly before, the CoC should not affect > you, unless you want to misbehave now. > > > > On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 03:02 -0400, Bruce Layne wrote: > > The "discussion" is apparently over and we still have the Code of > > Conduct. > > > > https://linuxcnc.org/CODE_OF_CONDUCT > > > > It wasn't much of a discussion. Questions were asked but there were > > no > > meaningful answers. > > > > At the risk of offending any programmers in the LinuxCNC community > > by > > appropriating programmer culture, here is my pseudo code for the > > LinuxCNC Code of Conduct Fait Accompli: > > > > > > 01 IMPOSE CODE OF CONDUCT ON LINUXCNC COMMUNITY > > 02 IF COMPLAINTS > 0 THEN GOTO 02 > > 03 END > > > > > > All of the complaints by those who didn't feel a code of conduct was > > needed have apparently now concluded and those who wanted a code of > > conduct to regulate other people's behavior have won without ever > > engaging on the issues... without ever justifying why their code of > > conduct was needed, without explaining what event might have > > precipitated the rules imposed on others, etc. > > > > There was no need to explain who would decide what is > > "disinformation" > > or "conspiracy theories", or who would decide what is "other conduct > > which could reasonably be considered inappropriate", or who would > > decide > > what is "inappropriate language" or "inappropriate images". There > > was > > no need to explain why the Code of Conduct was required when there > > were > > no hostile comments on this group until the Code of Conduct caused > > all > > of the recent animosity, resulting in exactly what it purported to > > prevent. > > > > One of the things I liked about LinuxCNC was that it was a community > > effort. Certainly there are a core group of contributors (greatly > > appreciated), but nobody was perceived as being in charge. There was > > a > > spontaneous order arising from mutual cooperation. This open source > > community functioned very well without a lot of rules, and certainly > > without any rulers. I no longer feel that way. At best, rather > > than > > everyone behaving with courtesy and respect toward others because > > it's > > the right thing to do, it now feels like coerced behavior. I now > > feel > > that this community is under the rule of unelected and as yet > > unnamed > > rulers. > > > > The process was so opaque that I still don't know if one person > > unilaterally enacted the Code of Conduct, or was there some > > oligarchy > > that made the decision after a secret discussion? > > > > When someone violates one of the subjective rules in the new Code of > > Conduct, will we then learn who the rulers are... or at least who > > the > > enforcers are? Or will dissidents be quietly disappeared in the > > middle > > of the night? > > > > An open source community that has always operated on mutual consent > > is > > now operating under dictatorial decree with all objections ignored > > and > > unanswered. I think that's very sad. > > > > I don't like the subjective rules in the Code of Conduct. They seem > > politically motivated and the vague rules can be selectively > > enforced. > > I also feel that the Code of Conduct will cause problems rather than > > preventing problems. That concern seems warranted based on the > > hostile > > arguments we've already suffered as a direct result of the Code of > > Conduct. Mostly, I didn't like the way the Code of Conduct was > > unilaterally decreed without discussion, and when a few people tried > > to > > initiate a discussion, they were ignored by the person who posted > > the > > Code of Conduct. I'm left with the feeling that there wasn't any > > explanation for why the Code of Conduct was needed because there > > wasn't > > an actual need to regulate the behavior of a group that has been > > self > > regulated for decades. The Code of Conduct couldn't be justified, > > so > > there was no effort to justify it. If there was an actual need, why > > wasn't there a discussion that led to community standards that were > > established by the community? That would have been a far less > > contentious process than someone posting the new Code of Conduct for > > everyone else to follow without prior discussion and without any > > community consensus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Emc-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
