
Matz: I cannot accept “the CoC” for the Ruby community - jp_sc
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#note-95
======
striking
From [https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#note-159](https://bugs.ruby-
lang.org/issues/12004#note-159)

> Our community have 20+ years of history. We had a few issues in the past,
> but all of them could be resolve by the communication.

> On the other hand, we had to take great care to avoid bureaucracy in our
> workflows and processes. For me, avoiding bureaucracy is far immediate
> danger. Of course, _I agree with you in part, so I agree to add kind of CoC
> for the community._

Matz agrees with a CoC, but sees the Contributor Covenant as heavy-handed.
Nothing wrong with that, no need to give this a title that's totally wrong.

------
a_bonobo
Weird title: He can accept "the CoC", not just the draft in that thread, he
wants a few changes (no banning, for example, people may want to change their
minds), and then he proposed a slightly reworded CoC that has his changes,
that's all

------
hkmurakami
I frankly can't understand how the OP's first response after Matz's CoC rough
draft is "now let's talk about enforcement." The priorities seem misconstrued
to me.

~~~
anonbanker
It's the clearest window into the intent of the OP.

------
anonbanker
A fun exercise:

Look through all the CoC supporters, and see how many bugs they have filed.

Then for added fun, see how many of the supporters of a CoC have even
_commented_ on other threads.

This is the very definition of astroturfing.

~~~
hobs
I don't like to comment on these types of threads on HN, but the same names
pop up in the same type of comments, bugs, or whatever various flavor of the
day for whatever software someone notices today.

I don't think everyone who submits a bug needs to be a significant contributor
to a project, but when someone says they want to create a set of rules (that
later in the thread "should be treated as law") to regulate something that
seems to be working, and that person is not a contributing member of the
community, something is wrong.

I don't know what overall benefit we would have if every software project had
a CoC(which seems to be their goal), it's like asking all of us to bundle one
with your birth certificate.

~~~
anonbanker
Just to answer the question, Exactly ONE (1) developer had posted in a
legitimate prior bug.

There were over ten people in the thread supporting the OP.

------
cat-dev-null
The discussion is a good thing. There are some dangers in blindly adopting
draconian Cider House Rules, because, for instance, they can be gamed as
cudgels to throw out individuals for any reasons rather than promote healthy
debate and social give-and-take.

~~~
tomjen3
True. I actually liked the progreqsl one that was liked in the thread.

~~~
cat-dev-null
Yeah, me too.

-1. There is legitimate trolling, harassment, drama and d!ck moves that need to be handled with decency, common-sense and least bad measures... in open societies in real life, specific laws and enforcement haven't yet been able to eliminate #sshole behavior... it's usually handled socially. Sure it's different, but there's got to be some common sense and due-process, rather than instahellban of a core dev because someone new makes a bogus accusation.

0\. Folks should try to calmly stand up to bullyvictim behavior and excessive
microagression drama.

1\. On large projects facing mostly public / non-enterprise / younger users,
there could be need for formal training of project leaders or designated
third-parties in conflict resolution / mediation to make peace, where
possible. (Maybe open source conflict resolution as a service would be a
viable startup? IDK, or a pockethotline perhaps?)

2\. 37signals showed less anonymous participation increased kindness and
reduced toxic behavior... perhaps projects should link accounts to G+ /
Facebook / Github?

3\. A risk of blindly adopting CoCs is that a new, amorphous bureaucracy of
unknown persons/governance itself gains a foothold into many projects, and may
come back and start asking for compliance reports, more control and more
changes. Some of this might be good, but it could become more about
browbeating others into bending to their will a-la Yale screaming girl
[https://youtu.be/9IEFD_JVYd0](https://youtu.be/9IEFD_JVYd0)

4\. Popularity of a behavior or trend is not necessarily equivalent to an
ethical and/or wise change, but it is worth discussing.

5\. Paraphrasing subversion folks _An undefended community ceases to be the
latter._

------
vacri
> _Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: ... Other
> unethical conduct_

This example is a bit... spongey.

~~~
Pengwin
The vagueness of terms and undocumented extent of what is part of
'participation in this project' are what I think a lot of people are having
issues with.

~~~
anonbanker
Plus, Matz doesn't want to be part of a community that can kick others out.

------
w-ll
The same drama has been playing out in the php community for the last few
weeks.

------
fixxer
Pretty solid and thoughtful response. Almost makes me want to learn Ruby.
Almost.

------
dannymick
I've seen too much "CoC" for one day. Goodnight HN.

