Yes, some CoC's may be fodder for satire and criticism because they cross the line when it comes to being excessively dogmatic. However, these things exist because online communities have been beset by hordes of assholes for a very long time. Many people feel excluded or are dismissed just because some jerk manages to wield a measure of virtual power.
It would be a mistake to move in the reverse direction now and abandon CoC's. If they're not working, perhaps change them or try something else, but the problem needs to be addressed.
> This rule is strict, and none are able to comply perfectly. Grace is readily granted for minor transgressions. All are encouraged to follow this rule closely, as in so doing they may expect to live happier, healthier, and more productive lives. The entire rule is good and wholesome, and yet we make no enforcement of the more introspective aspects.
EDIT: Saw that someones else had already commented on this. Leaving it up anyway. Sorry, folks!
Anyway, "we didn't need X then, why do we need X now" is an absolutely atrocious argument. Because demands and communities change obviously, and with them how we conduct and organise our communities and organisations.
"We didn't need X for Y years" is an excellent way of preventing progress, and/or gatekeeping. I feel like this has been covered pretty well online before, but I can expand my thoughts if you'd like.
No they have not. Everything was and is perfectly fine and cordial without them.
Did they? It's a Code of Conduct for communal matters that was written some 1500 years ago. Given that the Benedictine order still exists, it may well be practiced to this day (not sure if they updated it. I wouldn't see a reason.)
Given that there's no larger community around sqlite in the GitHub sense (they usually don't even take patches), and https://twitter.com/drichardhipp claims that DRH is Christian, they could as well pick a CoC that matches the family operation that is driving sqlite.
The page is rather explicit about not having to adhere to the CoC to _use_ sqlite in any shape or form, and you don't get to _develop_ sqlite anyway, so...
I don't see what they're getting out such an act. If CoC's don't apply to them, then may be they should shut-up about CoC's and focus more other things, like sqlite. Or, speak up about the CoC's in communities in which CoC's actually exist.
From the CoC page: "Having been encouraged by clients to adopt a written code of conduct"
Under my interpretation (not sure if it's the right one - it might as well be satire): "OK, here's a written CoC we abide by", meeting customer demand.
It's interesting that this thing existed for months and only now somebody noticed and created outrage.
> It's interesting that this thing existed for months and only now somebody noticed and created outrage.
The sqlite folks could have just answered to these "clients": "No, a CoC does not apply to us because x, y, z". Instead, they chose to insert themselves into the fray with a fairly aggressive piece of satire as an open letter. It was very much their choice, and they've now gotten themselves a lot negative impressions because of HN exposure, I think.
People may disagree on solutions while agreeing on problems, and disagreement with one solution out of many does not mean ignoring a problem.
Why is this so difficult to understand? Why this wave of active policing?
Also as a muslim, it's very amusing to me that there are people who are fighting for me without my asking them and yet them telling me and other muslim it's bad.
It's hilarious what the politically programmed noise-makers think of themselves.
As mentioned elsewhere in this thread: SQLite is "Open-Source, not Open-Contribution". In that context, an openly religious CoC does not seem out of the question.
Looking at the commit history for the project, all of the commits for 2018 have been from just three people (with 98% of those coming from just two of those).
While I'm sympathetic to the argument that sufficiently large projects should, on average, benefit from some degree of formalization of behavioral norms (whether you call it a code of conduct or something else), the recent trend of insisting (often abusively) that every open source project, however small, should adopt this practice is silly, annoying and has obviously caused a backlash in some parts of the open source community, hence this thread.
"in tech". The CoC we're discussing here exists - as CoC - for Millenia.
An even older example would be the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath, which might have been more appropriate as an example of a "code of work conduct", but "I swear by Apollo the Healer, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses" might rub some people the wrong way, including, in this case, sqlite's author.
From a user side: being able to see where the lines are, and being able to see an explicit reason for a punishment. Being able to point out when others are breaking explicit rules. Being able to see and point out hypocrisy.
This does require admins to actually follow the CoCs and to act on them, which I think a lot of people in this thread are actually bitching about. Everyone who says "CoCs don't do anything by themselves" are right, but seatbelts also don't do anything unless they're plugged in, but we should still have 'em in cars.
I'm seeing a problem here.
These code of conducts all boil down to "don't be a dick." It's too bad we need them, but we clearly do. Certain groups (LGBT, minorities) tend to get more abuse than others, so issues involving them are often spelled out more explicitly.
All large organizations have written standards of conduct. Open source software projects these days are often large, and are made up of heterogeneous groups of people. It's obvious that CoCs can be useful just the same, to reduce ambiguity in conflict if nothing else.
FreeBSD has their reasons and expression of the “don’t be a dick” rule, and SQLite has their reasons and expression of the same rule. I don’t see why either one is worth carping about. Both are expressions of cultural values that have nothing to do with the software being produced.
Regardless, I don't see how this satire could be considered dangerous.
Watch the twitter mob forming outside the window!
> "I hope there are discussions at REDACTED today about whether featuring SQLite on their front page is consistent with their values."
> "The message is clear: if you're concerned about diversity, decency, and inclusiveness, stay well away from the SQLite project."
> "I wonder if SQLite Consortium member organizations @mozilla, NDS association, @BentleySystems, @expensify, @business were consulted on this move."
> "This is the as*le: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._Richard_Hipp … (thanks @weigandtLabs for finding that out). He _is_ the main SQLite dev. And that's the community he's building. So SQLite is now dead -- or, at least, it should be."
Oh, don't worry SQLite, I do.
I fucking hope it's satire. Even so, this page should be nuked from orbit. It's shocking that SQLite would allow such a page on their domain.
When I was an athiest, I thought it was good advice at the time.
This rule is strict, and none are able to comply perfectly. Grace is readily granted for minor transgressions. All are encouraged to follow this rule closely, as in so doing they may expect to live happier, healthier, and more productive lives. The entire rule is good and wholesome, and yet we make no enforcement of the more introspective aspects.
Everyone is free to use the SQLite source code, object code, and/or documentation regardless of their opinion of and adherence to this rule. SQLite has been and continues to be completely free to everyone, without precondition.```
Do I have to go for confession before every pull request now?