She doesn't explicitly say that she wants to silence people or control their
speech, but how exactly do you think implementing her 6-step plan for
"reaching the goal of a diverse community"? One of two things is true: either
she is naïve about the nature of humans, or she wants to force people to
behave a particular way. Either way, suppressing speech is the only possible
way to do what she suggests.
Of course, if you own a server, there's nothing wrong with having rules or
guidelines regarding what kinds of things people are allowed to post there.
After all, it's your server. But this woman, and other social justice
warriors, has a belief that it is a moral obligation for other server owners
-- like whoever owns the server(s) running the Linux developer discussion
channels -- to regulate speech for her benefit. No, that isn't right. If she
wants to start her own special safe space for people like her who just can't
take the environment run by Mr. Torvalds et al, she can make it herself.
Additionally, if she gets her way, it will not end there. She will claim
victory, but then she will claim that there is another problem that needs to
be solved, again, inevitably by authoritarian means. Because this isn't
actually about a community. It's about her. And as long as she blames
problems she has on the community, rather than e.g. growing a thicker skin
like the rest of us, it will never be satisfactory.
So no, what she is advocating is not right. Any community which tries to
embrace her ideas will only suffer harm. Of course, that doesn't mean it's
wrong for her to express her views; to say otherwise would be something an
SJW would do.
