Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Or else what? "Asshole" according to whom? How are disagreements about assholery resolved?

This (and the original NCoC) is naive wishful thinking that won't survive first contact with an actual community issue.

Isn't the answer to all those questions whatever the owners of the repo want? I mean, its still a privately owned repository and communities.

If we're talking about small personal OSS projects, then yeah sure it doesn't really matter, because they're won't be a community to speak of.

Once you have a few other maintainers and contributors, there will inevitably be disagreements, and you have to have a realistic framework for resolving them respectfully and equitably.

You're probably right, and larger projects need a more formalized framework for CoCs.

> How are disagreements about assholery resolved?

You know, most git hosting platforms have nice "clone this project" and "fork" functions.

I think we're talking about different goals. I thought the goal was to foster a productive community working together on a project. Forking is a solution, but it doesn't exactly grow a community.

What's a "community"? The dictionary definition of "community" is people out there in the real world, who are exposed to some very real risks and need moral codes, etc. to protect from such. How much of this does actually translate online, where many contributors might even choose to remain anonymous and be 'identified' by some unpersonal login name?

Well, if you go to dictionary.com, you'll find this nice one:

> a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists (usually preceded by the)

Which dictionary did you get yours from? What other definitions did it have?

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact