I've read the thread here (not the original) and am somewhat confused actually.
Whilst this seems very reasonable -> In particular, do not sexualize the term “Julia” or any other aspects of the project. The following appears to invite contention. While “Julia” is a female name in many parts of the world, the programming language is not a person and does not have a gender. In English, "he" and "she" are commonly used to anthropomorphise, e.g. often mechanical machinery. On the other hand, in many other languages, gender is part of the grammar so that is not the case. So this statement, as written, will be confusing to people of such languages. Mixing the concepts "many parts of the world" and "gender" in the same sentence really does make this a very confusing and ambiguous statement. The interpretation of a statement like this shouldn't rely on a technical distinction that was in the writer's mind when they wrote it. What are you trying to prohibit here? Calling the programming language Julia a "she"? Or making sexual jokes about "Julia". If it's the latter and not the former (I'm being completely honest here, I can't tell), then just say so. Sorry I won't be able to monitor this thread. I simply wanted to briefly voice an opinion. I'm glad to see that the Julia community aims to be respectful, inclusive and to not discriminate. Bill. On Saturday, 10 October 2015 12:28:01 UTC+2, Tomas Lycken wrote: > > Since a recent thread was derailed into discussions about the code of > conduct in this community, I figured it would be better to move that > discussion here, in the hopes that the technical discussion in the other > thread can be picked up again. > > As a starting point, here is the actual Julia Community Standards > document: http://julialang.org/community/standards/ Please take a moment > to read it, even if you have read it before. It's always good to refresh > our memories of how we agree to treat each-other. > > And before I say anything else about it, I want to give a big shout-out to > Stefan Karpinski, who has, since I started lurking in these threads > somwhere in the spring of 2013, consistently enforced these standards > (whether they existed in written form yet or not) and kept the Julia > community civil and open (at least as far as I have been able to see). You > have done this with gentle force - always civil, but never yielding. I > sincerely hope (and I'm not worried) that you'll keep up the great work in > this. > > In the other thread it was easy to get the impression that a lot of people > don't agree with Stefan when he calls out standards violations. I doubt > that's true, and I for one am wholeheartedly on Stefan's - and several > others' in that thread - side in this. But the fact that this isn't > obvious, is to me a call-to-action for becoming a more active enforcer of > the Community Standards myself. If we all chip in, maintaining the > including environment that is the Julia community will not be a problem, > even as the community grows larger than what one person can handle. > > If you have thoughts on specific passages in the Community Standards, or > on how they are enforced, this thread is a better place to discuss those > concerns than a thread that was intended for tech. > > // T >
