I understand including more examples of unacceptable harassment for clarity, but I think they should not have included "level of experience".
It plays too well into some large companies "Embrace, extend, extinguish" strategies for dealing with open technologies. By being hospitable to people that obviously should not be contributing (eg, people who submit PRs through github) the talented contributors are allowing themselves to be open to a DDOS. There are many more bad programmers than good ones, and the dealing with the legions of unskilled programmers hired by "tech innovators" in their efforts to cut cost could grind kernel development to a halt. Then poof.
I'm not finding anything historical about companies abusing the free software community, but that chapter of history is still being written. There are examples of playing unfairly to gain dominance from the 90s through 2000s here though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
I am simply proposing that they are now in the "extend" phase with linux. It has been embraced. Now they will extend it (via the dev process, not the codebase) until it is unsustainable, and then it will be extinguished.
The code doesn't say they have to work with people of low levels of experience. It simply says they won't harass people for their lack of experience. Rejecting PRs submitted through github doesn't have to be abusive can simply be "We don't accept PRs via github, please read the contributor docs"
The effort of dealing with legions of unskilled programmers isn't made easier with harassment or abuse. It's made easier with documentation, tooling and a legion of patient programmers you can delegate management work to.
I don't understand the need for the sudden change. Like sure Linus could be blunt and direct. Like I understand some people would not expect that, but if I was being dumb I could understand someone calling what I did idiotic, brain-dead ect...
Must we go through this constantly? It's not that hard to understand.
Blunt and direct are one thing. Needlessly personally offensive is another.
You are fine with people who act like this. You'd assume you deserved it or you'd even feel honored. You're entitled to feel that way.
Many others think there's no excuse for behaving in that way. We think it's destructive, and that Linus and Linux succeeded despite it. Many of us would never subject ourselves to such an environment.
I get disagreeing. But what is so perplexing about it?
Well if you don't understand it's because you're a brain dead idiot. Anyone with even half a brain and who had ever been in a room with a functioning human being would implicitly understand the need for change and would have been expecting it for years.
I am tangentially aware of the blow ups the Linus delivered, having read stuff here, but am curious, and an honest question, where the blowups based on what the code of conduct covers?
" age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation."
My impression was he would call people idiots, in as many ways as possible, and such, but was not aware that these code of conduct identified groups were used.
The "Level of experience" bit is a favorite of the Coraline monster that pushed for this COC.
Technology is ableist by default (from "techne", skill), and should be kept esoteric until problems get fixed by competent people (instead of this essoteric nonsense that dumbs things down in the hope of including everyone, namely people that cannot program nor intend to).
Abuse is always wrong and Linus was abusive. Some of his stuff was way over the line. You left the first part of the quote out of the comment:
> pledge to making participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone
Just because you and your buddies are okay with talking like that doesn't make it acceptable. People do actually get hurt by this stuff, and the minute you do that you're victimizing someone.
20 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 22.0 ms ] threadIt plays too well into some large companies "Embrace, extend, extinguish" strategies for dealing with open technologies. By being hospitable to people that obviously should not be contributing (eg, people who submit PRs through github) the talented contributors are allowing themselves to be open to a DDOS. There are many more bad programmers than good ones, and the dealing with the legions of unskilled programmers hired by "tech innovators" in their efforts to cut cost could grind kernel development to a halt. Then poof.
I am simply proposing that they are now in the "extend" phase with linux. It has been embraced. Now they will extend it (via the dev process, not the codebase) until it is unsustainable, and then it will be extinguished.
The code doesn't say they have to work with people of low levels of experience. It simply says they won't harass people for their lack of experience. Rejecting PRs submitted through github doesn't have to be abusive can simply be "We don't accept PRs via github, please read the contributor docs"
The effort of dealing with legions of unskilled programmers isn't made easier with harassment or abuse. It's made easier with documentation, tooling and a legion of patient programmers you can delegate management work to.
usually they are on twitter trying to cause people to loose their jobs.
No companies have that strategy. Get over the slashdot meme from 20 years ago.
Blunt and direct are one thing. Needlessly personally offensive is another.
You are fine with people who act like this. You'd assume you deserved it or you'd even feel honored. You're entitled to feel that way.
Many others think there's no excuse for behaving in that way. We think it's destructive, and that Linus and Linux succeeded despite it. Many of us would never subject ourselves to such an environment.
I get disagreeing. But what is so perplexing about it?
/linus style
" age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation."
My impression was he would call people idiots, in as many ways as possible, and such, but was not aware that these code of conduct identified groups were used.
Technology is ableist by default (from "techne", skill), and should be kept esoteric until problems get fixed by competent people (instead of this essoteric nonsense that dumbs things down in the hope of including everyone, namely people that cannot program nor intend to).
There, I said it.
> pledge to making participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone
Just because you and your buddies are okay with talking like that doesn't make it acceptable. People do actually get hurt by this stuff, and the minute you do that you're victimizing someone.