Conversation

You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Oct 23, 2018

Replying to

@TheQuQu

@johnregehr

and 3 others

There's an intentionally high barrier to entry for contributing code or even reporting a bug but there's an open community around the core developers that's moderated by them on the mailing lists, etc. This code of conduct is meant to extend to that too.

Replying to

And this should reflect negatively on the project's public image and be a factor in deciding whether to use or continue to use it.

Replying to

It reflects negatively on my view of the project and all I'm trying to say is that I can understand why they would do this based on their beliefs. I think it's a sincere, ridiculous decision rather than trolling. I think this is genuinely meant to reflect their beliefs.

Replying to

I really don't think the intention is to ridicule a standard secular humanist / progressive take on a Code of Conduct. I think they looked at them, fundamentally disagree with some minor aspects of it and tried to choose something better representing their values, etc.

Replying to

The one aspect of the Contributor Convenant that I strongly dislike is asking to respect *viewpoints* rather than the people expressing those views. I also find it silly to treat religion as an innate protected class rather than being part of ethical, political and other beliefs.

You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more

Replying to

I'm just talking about the content of contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/co rather than their rationale for making it. I haven't looked at previous versions but this looks pretty good to me other than asking to respect viewpoints rather than the people expressing them.

Replying to

I think "use of sexualized language or imagery" also needs more nuance and I think the current way of stating and interpreting it is often taken too far. I understand where they're coming from with that though. Even just "use of inappropriate sexualized language or imagery".

12:40 AM · Oct 23, 2018Twitter Web Client

You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more

Replying to

I don't think it matters if it's officially adopted or not by a project. I do think it makes sense for projects to try to avoid harassment and to be a welcoming place for people of different backgrounds, etc. Overall, that document is a decent set of guidelines to follow.

Show replies