
On the Proposed PHP Code of Conduct - bwaine
http://paul-m-jones.com/archives/6214
======
tptacek
This is a an argument built on appeals both to Eric S. Raymond and the last
several years of Twitter/Tumblr drama. It doesn't even discuss the CoC;
instead, it adopts as a premise that any CoC that refers to "safety”,
“welcoming” and “respect" must be tool of Twitter oppressors.

There are valid arguments against widespread adoption of CoCs (for instance:
they can end up as window dressing). But this isn't an example of one.

~~~
CoCplusgood
I knew that the #1 "rebuttal" of this would be: "links to ESR: disqualified!"

>it adopts as a premise that any CoC that refers to "safety”, “welcoming” and
“respect" must be tool of Twitter oppressors

No it doesn't. It explains its argument for why that is, and provides
examples.

Edit: I also knew, when I saw this post had been up for an hour, that it
wouldn't make it to hour 2, no matter how many upvotes.

~~~
mooseburger
Why did you think it wouldn't make it? Does HN have a policy to avoid anything
related to the SJW mess? Genuinely curious, I'm a new user.

~~~
CoCplusgood
Yes. Things like this often get memory-holed. I don't know if it's by users or
mods, but because I have showdead on and this post still can't be found on the
front (or next) page, I tend to think the latter. It also doesn't say
"flagged" on it.

~~~
gherkin0
This is a weird post: it's been popping on and off the front page for me,
which might have something to do with the "vouch" feature I just learned
about. It seems like it's the object of a tug-of-war.

~~~
dang
That's exactly what it is.

~~~
CoCplusgood
Thanks for the explanation. I'm sorry that my misunderstanding of the UI, and
some bias around the subject, led to conspiratorial thinking.

I wish the community didn't have such a slim tolerance for discussion of this
subject that's not uniformly toeing the progressive line, as I thought this
was fair in tone and argument, but if I'm in the minority, it's nothing to go
nuts about. I can see both sides.

~~~
dang
Posts about this and related topics get heavily flagged regardless of what
side they're on. I don't see the community in toto as driven ideologically one
way or the other, though obviously some subgroups are.

We turn the flags off sometimes when an article is particularly substantive.
For example, we did that yesterday for
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10923885](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10923885),
because that article was factual and had historical value. When we do that,
though, it isn't because we agree or disagree ideologically.

------
allendoerfer
I think there should not be any Code of Conduct in OSS projects. I like the
BDFL model more. If the BDFL does not like what you do, you are out of luck.
Join or create a fork. If what the BDFL likes does not resonate, nobody will
contribute and the project will die.

I think hacking was never about politics through words. Sure hackers might had
or have an agenda, but their weapon is programming not writing. I have nothing
against political activists who use writing as their tool of choice, but there
are plenty of groups you can join and do that. For me it makes no sense to mix
the two concepts together and scare away actual hackers who just want to write
code.

If you do not like the community, fork it. That is was everybody does for
technical or political reasons, why should there be written rules for stuff
most people like to do as a hobby in their free time?

------
tzs
(This story became flagged between the time I finished this comment and the
time I submitted it. I used "vouch" to unflag so I could post the comment
anyway, then "unvouch" to undo my vouch. While it was vouched, it got upvotes
and this comment got upvotes, leading me to believe that there _is_ interest
in discussing this, but I'll leave it to others to make that decision)

The proposed code of conduct is terrible, because of this unclear section:

    
    
       This Code of Conduct applies both within project spaces
       and in public spaces when an individual is representing
       the project or its community.
    

What is a "public space" and what counts as "representing the project or its
community"?

For example, suppose Alice [1] is a core contributor to PHP and they adopt
this code of conduct as written. On her Facebook public biographical
information she proudly lists her PHP affiliation.

She also mentions her hobby of writing adult-oriented Harry Potter fan
fiction, and links to her stories at fanfiction.net. These stories are full of
sexualized language and imagery. Her author page at fanfiction.net also cites
her PHP affiliation.

Is Facebook a "public space"? Is fanfiction.net a "public space"? Is listing
her PHP affiliation on those sties count as "representing the project or its
community"?

This is _not_ just a theoretical issue. The author of that code of conduct
submitted an issue to a project on Github that was not using a code of conduct
trying to convince them to remove someone who tweeted something she thought
was transphobic, on the grounds that he mentioned the project in his Twitter
profile and so his statements reflect on the project [2].

[1] I'm using Alice as a generic name here. If there are any people named
Alice who are PHP contributors, this is not a reference to them.

[2]
[https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941](https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941)

PS: Swift is using the same code of conduct. I sent them an email asking how
they interpret these things, and their response was:

    
    
       We want to clarify with you that “representing the project
       or its community” in the context of “public spaces” refers
       to behavior at Swift-oriented events, and not to individual
       social/online profiles or unrelated interests.
    

PPS: The author of this code of conduct has stated that version 1.4 will
expand that unclear section by adding:

    
    
       Due to their strong association with the project, core 
       contributors are always seen as actively representing it.
    

See
[https://github.com/CoralineAda/contributor_covenant/issues/1...](https://github.com/CoralineAda/contributor_covenant/issues/125)

~~~
Tomte
What's vouch? The opposite to flag? Available to hand-picked users or is that
based on another karma level?

It's always fascinating to learn about mechanisms I've never even heard about,
either by such comments or by dang's mails telling you to do X.

~~~
gherkin0
I was curious too, and I found this post explaining it:

[http://blog.ycombinator.com/two-hn-
announcements](http://blog.ycombinator.com/two-hn-announcements)

------
theinternetman
The fact the creator of this CoC started out by personally going to projects
and calling them out for not having a CoC then trying to sell them on their
own CoC should be reason enough to roll your own instead of forking
Contributor Covenant and letting them get fame and speaking dosh from
harassing maintainers into using their project.

CoCs are a good thing, but should be something coming from inside the project
outwards.

------
Bahamut
This post seems to be complaining about oppression, but doesn't seem to
address the opposite end, oppressive attitudes/terminology used to intimidate
those advocating for social equality. It offers no pathway to making the
situation better.

This sort of discussion seems to go in an endless loop since one side wants to
advocate for equality & try to use as many tools as possible to that end,
while the other side does not seem to like the heavyhandedness & prefer to
maintain the status quo as a reactionary measure, which does nothing to fix
this disconnect or the fundamental issues.

It would be more productive to acknowledge the problems that plague others
wanting to enter the ecosystem, and try to do things about it than to complain
that one side is acting in an undesired manner - the status quo is already
undesired as it is.

~~~
exstudent2
The problem is that these CoCs are being pushed on open source projects not
because there is or was a problem with that project, but simply to push the
politics of the CoC authors.

Was there actual bad behavior going on in the PHP project that prompted the
CoC to be submitted? In the case of Opal, there wasn't. One of the core
contributors said something on his _personal_ Twitter that offended someone,
then people came into the project with CoCs demanding his head.

Anyone can fork a project. That's how you deal with a toxic community, not
strong arm yourself into a position to judge and oust existing community
members and use the media to shame those that oppose you.

~~~
Bahamut
Forking is an extraordinary measure, and often not practical - that is usually
a very poor option.

Personally, I disagree with your approach to dealing with a toxic community.
Having done moderation in various forums/chat rooms & now open source for
almost 12 years, that's usually an approach that encourages poor behavior
through insufficient action. As to a solution, I don't know what would be the
best way to prevent it, but I'm not so naive to suggest there is an easy one-
sided path to avoid it.

~~~
exstudent2
The thing is these communities aren't actually toxic. Large open source
projects take patches based on merit. Lots of people don't even have human
identifiable usernames or avatars on Github and yet get patches accepted.

The _real_ toxic behavior that's been happening in open source over the past 5
or so years is the influx of non-developers forcing their political causes
into projects and distracting from actual development while bringing negative
media attention to OSS via clickbait/ragebait friendly stories.

~~~
thescribe
I think you stated that better than I ever could.

I perceive a code of conduct as colonization, and the arguments/drama as a
beachhead.

------
raziel2p
I've never read the Rosario github thread before, but it seems fairly obvious
to me that this is a troll - or at least, I'm uncertain enough about its
legitimacy to not use it as a prime example of SJWs threatening open source
contributors.

------
paulhallett
This post directly targets an individual in the PHP community and not the CoC
in question. I'd suggest renaming this post as misguidance, irregardless of
which side it is from, isn't addressing the point.

~~~
noir_lord
I don't think he is attacking her, stating his objections to something she
proposed isn't an attack neither is pointing out things she has said and/or
written.

