[Libre-silicon-devel] Code of conduct

[David Lanzendörfer]

Hmm. This gave me a lot to think about.
Maybe just adapting the heavy handed CCP approach and just banning anything 
which might cause a problem isn't the right way to go after all... Hmm...
I mean, if someone wants to smear this project, they can always find something
trying to curate content doesn't help anyway, because experience shows that 
they then just invent stuff if needed.
I mean, anyone with common sense will understand that a group with a multitude
of members has a diverse range of opinions of which none are representative of
the project goal itself.
Not that 2021 has been the year in which humanity would have really proven
to have a broadly present common sense, but still.

Maybe just a disclaimer somewhere to please TRY to avoid starting political
debates on this mailing list?

On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 3:11:12 PM WEST lkcl wrote:
> On August 24, 2021 11:07:00 PM UTC, "David Lanzendörfer" 
<leviathan at libresilicon.com> wrote:
> >Well.
> >I find this NCoC most suitable so far, because I fully agree with it...
> 
> i took a look, it seems to be a (amusing but relevant) anti-backlash
> reaction to the extraordinarily damaging blinkered toxic contributor
> covenant.  the issue with "anti-anything" is unfortunately the focus on the
> "anything" bit.
> 
> i do like that it says "we assume everyone is adults" although this could be
> misconstrued as patronising, i am confident that people who understand the
> intent will get through that.
> 
> the Libre-SOC Charter is at its heart utterly simple:
> 
> * Always do good
> * Never do harm
> * the code applies 100% of the time
> * Everyone knows the Code.
> 
> this again assumes "everyone is Adults" without actually spelling that out
> (because Adults don't *need* it spelled out).
> 
> it also assumes that everyone knows the difference between "good" and "harm"
> AGAIN WITHOUT SPELLING THAT OUT OR INSULTING PEOPLE by smashing them in the
> face with an ultra-toxic, patronising and self-sabotaging list of divisive
> self-defeating behaviours and characteristics, which, by definition, are
> always going to be incomplete.
> 
> by being so profoundly simple and yet defining the Charter in terms of
> "good" and "harm" it is extraordinarily flexible i.e. can be constantly
> analysed and adaptive.
> 
> you *know* when someone does (or does not do) or writes something that harms
> the project.
> 
> not because it was one of the f*****g stupid toxic proscribed behaviours,
> but because of the adverse impact the action (or inaction) had.
> 
> example: a case could be made that the recent discussion which triggered the
> demand for a CoC was BENEFICIAL to the project.
> 
> that although it irritated some people it actually covered quite important
> uncomfortable topics that people were nervous even to discuss, which could
> risk people being imprisoned or fined if they had not thought about the
> issues. [due to Asperger's i have no such fear]
> 
> just because you feel UNCOMFORTABLE does NOT equate to "The Project Has Been
> Harmed".
> 
> this is the risk of the stupid toxic CoCs: i cannot tell you how many times
> some dickheaded morons have judged me by their stupid proscribed list of
> behaviours, instead of seeing me as a human being.  you can tell i am
> pissed off by such shortsighted judgemental behaviour, effectively abuse:
> it makes me both angry and sad at the same time.
> 
> in short i advocate that you consider thinking very carefully about a
> Charter and CoC.  anti-this and anti-that statements will come back to
> haunt you, in short order.
> 
> l.
> _______________________________________________
> Libresilicon-developers mailing list
> Libresilicon-developers at list.libresilicon.com
> https://list.libresilicon.com/mailman/listinfo/libresilicon-developers


-- 
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Ninja Bunny.
(")_(")
Copy and paste Bunny into your
signature to help him gain world domination