sure, but I don't really mind alienating people who think that requiring people to use other's preferred pronouns is equivalent to sharia law. I get that that's how some people feel, but understanding a mindset doesn't mean you need to think it's valid.
-
-
so the question remains: what is to be done in cases where some org members behave badly? I can't think of any better solutions that handling things on a case-by-case basis and stop LARPing justice court. There's no due process here. This isn't a court and nobody is a judge.
-
there's a pretty well known failure mode there, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tyranny_of_Structurelessness …
-
Chiming back in — I think CoCs can be useful to set expectations and give community members a pathway for redress when they're wronged. But really the quality of the leadership is what determines whether the CoC will be a useful tool as intended, or a bludgeon
-
sure, nothing's a silver bullet. I just think that having _some_ CoC_ is generally better than leaving it up to opaque/informal hierarchies
-
suppose there was a highly motivated and organized group of _right wing_ activists entering FOSS orgs and pressuring the orgs to adopt CoCs that subtly promoted their tribal value system. Would you feel the same way about it?
-
I think you make a good point, but there's also an argument that the opposite happens with pushing against CoCs like, both sides weaponize the FL/OSS project in question regardless of whether they actually contribute to it (I am definitely guilty of this!)
-
right, pushing for and pushing against, it's the same culture war polarization we see everywhere. culture war armistice is the solution. CoCs are a weapon in the culture war. Time to put the weapons down.
-
expect to see more tradcon, rightwing encoded CoCs introduced in the future. SQLite is a relatively light-hearted example of it. There will be nastier ones coming.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
how about orgs without CoC's? Can you think of any potential risks there?
-
different ones and more manageable imo and ime. the main risk in an org without a codified CoC is that two parties in conflict might disagree about appropriate redress after the fact. a CoC forces them to agree before the fact, or exit the org.
-
but I think disagreements of that kind are readily solvable on a case-by-case basis via arbitration and negotiation. that seems easier and more elegant than a formal CoC, and has less collateral damage.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.