@jordan31 @eloquence To an extent, you're right kind of right. Deeds, not words. If you want more free software, just build it.
On the other hand, after you've done the deed, I think you should also talk about it so people know you had a particular political motive with that deed.
I wish the FSF had done more deeds. It should be the FSF Summer of Code, not GSoC. It should be FSFHub, not Github; FSF-OS not Android.
Under RMS's leadership, the FSF just has had many words and few deeds.
So the only way to be safe would be to explain all politics all the time. That's tiresome for all involved and it likely means that people will focus on the differences, forming social bubbles and reducing cooperation.
Meanwhile proprietary software continues to be built without that friction because enterprises can paper over smaller (and even larger) political differences by establishing a "don't ask, don't tell" framework for politics, because they want to get shit done, and they pay enough to make people follow that policy.
@patrick @JordiGH @eloquence @jordan31@theres.life omg is this sqlite thing real or an april fools?
@robey @patrick @eloquence It's real, the lead dev really is religious.
@JordiGH @robey @patrick @eloquence it was in response to calla for sqlite to have a code of conduct. i don’t know whether this part is true, but what he claomed was that since he’s the only developer, having a code of conduct was kind of absurd. so he put up a statement about how he conducts himself.
@JordiGH @robey @patrick @eloquence i have since noticed there may be other developers?
it was borderline- since codes of condict are a good idea, it was read by some to be mocking the idea of codes of conduct. but i don’t think that was the intent
Apparently they drafted it in response to checkbox items in contract material that asked "what CoC are you using?"
"Everything is political" quickly leads to demanding that people discuss matters that they wouldn't discuss otherwise and then not liking their answer (maybe merely because it's unusually phrased as in the CoE, which is why the reaction to it became my go-to example for the problem).
It's a divisive philosophy and I'm not sure Free Software can afford balkanizing its ecosystem that way.
And just for clarification, somebody who just won't shut up about their controversial beliefs despite being told that they make people uncomfortable is an entirely different situation ("push" vs. "pull" information flow):
Pushing an agenda because "they're right", with no regard if that makes others within a group uncomfortable, poisons a community and there needs to be a way to evict such people - even if they have a claim to fame from 40 years ago.
@patrick @JordiGH @zens @eloquence i think you might be making the same mistake as the sqlite people in this case: a code of "conduct" is different from a code of "ethics". COE is what they believe inside. COC is a statement of expected behavior. it prevents misunderstandings about someone's actions.
if i ask a project for its COC and they tell me they worship the pangolin gods of venus, i'm going to very naturally be concerned. :)
An earlier version of the CoC document (https://www.sqlite.org/docsrc/file?name=pages/codeofconduct.in&ci=af1ee4516a565747) contained the following paragraph: "However, comments posted on mailing lists or forums are expected to be courteous and professional, and should be worded as if they were written by someone who is a follower of this rule. [...] Violators brought to the attention of the project leader will be reproved, gently at first but with increasing urgency, and may ultimately be banned if the behavior is not amended." (note: it doesn't ask people to "follow The Rule", just to behave in the community in a way compatible to it)
Isn't that the missing link from "professional" CoCs which provides a pledge to honor the company manual in interactions with another company to a "community" CoC that deals with an unbounded set of people interacting together by demanding CoC adherence on everybody "Terms of Services"-style?
@patrick @JordiGH @zens @eloquence the paragraph you quoted would -- to me -- suffice as a perfectly fine CoC on its own. it's a good example of the form. it declares expected behavior and how they handle violations: the very definition of a CoC.
i can't comment on the rest of it because i couldn't even make it past 3 items on their cult declaration page before i closed the tab.
(i don't understand your "company manual" paragraph but i haven't really been following the thread)
