Editorial Linux Community Hit by the Blight of Social Justice Warfare, A Great Purge is Coming

[lexluthermiester]

In reference to the poll; How the hell is "Inclusion" ahead of "Merit"?!? When it comes to doing work, skill and talent are infinitely more important than diversity, always.

 

[R-T-B]

In reference to the poll; How the hell is "Inclusion" ahead of "Merit"?!? When it comes to doing work, skill and talent are infinitely more important than diversity, always.

That's obviously a contentious point, but it's also irrelevant I'd argue. They both can be balanced together and one does not exclude the other.

This whole thread and poll is designed to divide and it's shameful.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Can someone invoke Godwin's law here, and kill this monster.

The original topic was political correctness seeping into coding. With respect, this started out as a discussion about the impact of cultured speech on coding. The topic was whether individuals without a filter do more damage by being combative, or whether the end product working is worth this. That topic is interesting, and is ripe enough for a discussion. There's always room to discuss the prices and rewards of free speech.

Then there's the other 7 pages of insanity. I get the SJW angle, and taking umbrage with this. I get the politics surrounding the issue being of great importance. What I don't get is how a discussion about coding has spiraled into ethnic integration, political bend, equality of outcome versus equality of opportunity, and memes.


Can we get back to the much less....inflamatory....discussion of the expression of free speech in coding? It's a worthwhile, and less massive, topic to discuss whether inclusion or outcome is valued more highly and how freely we should be allowed to express our opinions.

Please. Here, let me take the bullet. You're a dirty authoritarian, why yes I am. Godwin envoked, so this absolute mess can die. Maybe dissecting this mess can....never mind. I'm about to ask whether lessons were learned, but it never will be. Maybe....I don't know, maybe it'd time to stop reading here again. It seems like this is just devolving from fruitful discussion to irreparable fracturing.

 

[lexluthermiester]

That's obviously a contentious point

How so? When an employer is looking to hire someone they will hire the most qualified applicant. They rarely care about anything other than skill-set and qualifications.

but it's also irrelevant I'd argue

You can argue all you wish, it doesn't make you correct.

They both can be balanced together

Why bother?

one does not exclude the other.

True.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Hah. I'm surprised you're the only one who quoted this.

This is one of those things that will go under the radar, and later, everyone will wonder how it all turned to crap.

There's a lot of that in this thread. Very little substance, a whole lot of drivel.


For the record, Contributor Covenant is ran by a self-proclaimed social justice warrior.

 

[R-T-B]

How so?

Look at the poll.

 

[lexluthermiester]

There's a lot of that in this thread. Very little substance, a whole lot of drivel.

Oh good I'm not the only one who thinks this..

For the record, Contributor Covenant is ran by a self-proclaimed social justice warrior.

Twit.

Look at the poll.

It's just a poll. One with results that show just how many people are out of touch with reality..

 

[R-T-B]

Why bother?

Because both matter.

You can argue all you wish, it doesn't make you correct.

No, but do you really believe one excludes the other? I mean you... don't seem to think that below? Meh, my main point is we aren't getting anywhere here. Put this monster to sleep.

It's just a poll.

Hey, I'm not the one who asked why the numbers were where they are...

For the record, Contributor Covenant is ran by a self-proclaimed social justice warrior.

I am pretty much the same category, FWIW.

One with results that show just how many people are out of touch with reality..

Oh come on now. Can't we just accept our opinions != reality and call it a day?

 

[lexluthermiester]

Because both matter.

Not when it comes to getting work done.

No, but do you really believe one excludes the other?

No. I think one takes precedent over the other. Skills and qualifications above all else, IE Merit first and foremost.

Meh, my main point is we aren't getting anywhere here. Put this monster to sleep.

Why? Because those voicing common sense and logical reasoning are making actual sense?

I am pretty much the same category, FWIW.

Oh please don't lump yourself in with that kinda of group. You're better than that.

 

[R-T-B]

Why? Because those voicing common sense and logical reasoning are making actual sense?

That's... really not what's happening here at all. Don't pretend that it's quite laughable.

Not when it comes to getting work done.

They aren't mutually exclusive. A agressive personality can prevent otherwise very productive people from being able to work with their bad behaviors. And that's really why both are important for maximal productivity. Big corperations have done studies on this and concluded the same man... You think MS-embraced diversity just to please us SJW? You know better than that.

Oh please don't lump yourself in with that kinda of group. You're better than that.

I've always been there. Maybe you need to start reconsidering that insult.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I am pretty much the same category, FWIW.

Should a self-proclaimed social justice warrior ever be trusted to write rules all of humanity is expected to abide by? Conflict of interest much? Ironic that it was literally the "Code of Conflict" her words replaced...

 

[R-T-B]

Should a self-proclaimed social justice warrior ever be trusted to write rules all of humanity is expected to abide by? Conflict of interest much?

Should anyone with any political affiliation be allowed to? What do you think happens in the various Senates across our nation?

And it's not all of humanity. This is people who sign on.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

"...we do not want to do anything to cause the quality of submission and eventual result to ever decrease." What did adopting her Code of Conduct do? Threaten to not merely decrease, but obliterate the code base.

This thread is about code. Code doesn't give a damn about politics.

No anyone that wants to contribute to Linux has to bow at the alter of social justice before entry is granted. Linux is done for.

 

[R-T-B]

What did adopting her Code of Conduct do? Threaten to not just decrease, but obliterate the code base.

Maybe. But I wasn't the one arguing the argument you just quoted. And I still doubt anything signifigant will change, but we shall see.

I do find it ironic that this of all things has made more people passionate about Linux than ever before.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Should a self-proclaimed social justice warrior ever be trusted to write rules all of humanity is expected to abide by? Conflict of interest much? Ironic that it was literally the "Code of Conflict" her words replaced...

If you ask the social justice warrior to write the rules you invite a curtailing of speech. If you ask them, you get a rhetoric of how people are being protected, because everyone deserves to be safe.

I'd like two codes of conduct. The first can be social justice, and the second by somebody writing code 9-5 (or much longer realistically) freelance. The later is based upon people driven idealistically, the former by those who understand practical reality. Where the two overlap you keep it. Where they diverge you poll the top 20% of contributors to see how they land and implement the majority vote.

The logic is as such:
1) Items universally defined are agreed to by polar opposites, and don't need discussion.
2) Items in question are community driven.
3) Contribution means having a voice. Merit overcomes mob mentality, and those who wish a stronger voice need only demonstrate they deserve a hand in shaping the future.


It's representative democracy at its finest. The current plan is more akin to authoritarian regimes, and as others stated will likely see another fork. I would like to see the social justice forking though. It would demonstrate quite clearly whether inclusion or merit are the objectively better systems...and I'd like to warm my popcorn for the insane mess that follows. No matter who wins, we collectively lose in the race to demonstrate the better angels of our natures.



Edit:
Redefined realistic experience. It was..a poor choice of example.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't think this has been posted here yet:
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1809.2/06864.html

TL;DR:

First, let me confirm that this threat has teeth.

"Threat" being judge ordering author's code being removed from the project because the reward of reputation is gone.

Realistically, the SJW Linux can be rendered inoperable by court order, even if they do fork.

 

[GoldenX]

Once again, The Great Murica ruining something...

 

[Solidstate89]

That's obviously a contentious point, but it's also irrelevant I'd argue. They both can be balanced together and one does not exclude the other.

This whole thread and poll is designed to divide and it's shameful.

That people believe that you can't be an inclusive organization without disregarding the talent of the people you hire is proof in and of itself of why self-described "meritocracies" are bullshit and never actually about "just merit."

So is the ridiculous belief that programming is apolitical when the entire open source movement is in and of itself a political answer to massive corporations and the control they exert on software and the hardware that it runs on. It's as political as it gets; from the very beginning it was political and it remains so today. Things like the Whisper Protocol and TOR exist for political reasons to accomplish political goals.

 

[R-T-B]

reward of reputation is gone.

How so?

That would be the rub and the chief point you'd have to establish, I'd think.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That people believe that you can't be an inclusive organization without disregarding the talent of the people you hire is proof in and of itself of why self-described "meritocracies" are bullshit and never actually about "just merit."

So is the ridiculous belief that programming is apolitical when the entire open source movement is in and of itself a political answer to massive corporations and the control they exert on software and the hardware that it runs on. It's as political as it gets; from the very beginning it was political and it remains so today. Things like the Whisper Protocol and TOR exist for political reasons to accomplish political goals.

Meritocracy is simply this: if your code is better than your peers, it gets included and you get recognition for it; repeat ad infinitum.

How so?

That would be the rub and the chief point you'd have to establish, I'd think.

Because Linux is now obligated to adopt the code that is more inclusive rather than better (performing, elegant, secure, compact, etc.).

In the U.S. there is case law confirming that reputational losses relating to conversion of the rights of a contributor to a GPLed project are judicable in law.

The meritocracy is dead. The rights are no longer the original contributors which can claim damages by loss of reputation (basically slander).

 

[R-T-B]

Because Linux is now obligated to adopt the code that is more inclusive rather than better (performing, elegant, secure, compact, etc.).

This would depend on the kernel degrading. I really don't see that happening at all. And no, the current CoC does not force adopting code that is more inclusive. Didn't you read it?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.

Torvalds' dissent about the master/slave patch would have resulted in his banning. Hell, anyone that dissents because some SJW feels "offended" can now be banned from the community. Censorship - meritocracy = idiotic commits are inevitable. Valuable contributors like Torvalds will leave by force or choice. Project stagnates. Project gets abandoned. The only way that doesn't happen is if corporations keep supporting it. Without people like Torvalds staying on top of exploits and new hardware features, that's not assured.

Nevermind the fact that if there is a huge legal fight because of the Code of Conduct and death of the meritocracy, there will only be scraps left over.

 

[R-T-B]

Torvalds dissent about the master/slave patch would have resulted in his banning. Hell, anyone that dissents because some SJW feels "offended" can now be banned from the community. Censorship - meritocracy = idiotic commits are inevitable.

Not if he uses constructive criticism and non agressive languagee... Is that so hard and foreign these days?

Censorship - meritocracy = idiotic commits are inevitable.

Oh, the irony. Some of the old commits of yore would make you think meritocracy was a game of retarded social monopoly...

Like it or not, this whole thing came about because the current "meritocracy" was not working properly. Maybe there's a better answer, but ground zero sure ain't it.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Not if he uses constructive criticism and non agressive languagee... Is that so hard and foreign these days?

"Criticism heard and ignored." Some people never listen. Even when told something is hot, they touch it anyway. Meritocracy protected Linux from those types of people. Not anymore it isn't.

Like it or not, this whole thing came about because the current "meritocracy" was not working properly.

For SJWs whom really have nothing of value to contribute and were called out for it.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I've always been there. Maybe you need to start reconsidering that insult.

You don't come off that way, generally.

For SJWs whom really have nothing of value to contribute and were called out for it.

That's about right.