HN Explorer

Tell HN: SQLite changes are not innocent

5 points by s9w ↗ HN
Since the news that "the SQLite project has officially adopted the Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines as its Code of Conduct", I feel like it's not understood how bad things really are. Here are some gems from these Guidelines:

> Hurtful or harmful language related to: > - Background > - Gender identity or expression > - Ability > - Geographic location > - Other attributes > [...] > is not acceptable. This includes deliberately referring to someone by a gender that they do not identify with, and/or questioning the legitimacy of an individual’s gender identity

or

> Physical contact or simulated physical contact (such as emojis like “kiss”) without affirmative consent is not acceptable.

or

> [...] we recognize that it is possible for actions taken outside of Mozilla’s online or inperson spaces to have a deep impact on community health. (For example, in the past, we publicly identified an anonymous posting aimed at a Mozilla employee in a non-Mozilla forum as clear grounds for removal from the Mozilla community.)

It's exactly the opposite as it claims to be ('inclusiveness' and 'being save'). I don't understand how these far-reaching changes are infesting the software ecosystem. I wouldn't touch software with this political attitude with a 10-foot pole professionally. Who knows what they will chose to add next week?

Reference link: https://sqlite.org/codeofconduct.html

7 comments

[ 0.20 ms ] story [ 26.6 ms ] thread
core-questions
I fear your post will be deleted soon, my friend, and that if it survives it will be attacked. SQLite tried to do the softest, most reasonable stand against this CoC stuff, and the result was an outcry that caused them to have to knuckle under immediately.

> I wouldn't touch software with this political attitude with a 10-foot pole professionally.

How can you explain to your boss why this CoC is not to your liking, and still keep your job? There can be no defense against this incursion, only anger and grumbling online until it is shut down.

They used to call it the 'long march through the institutions', but now shortcuts are being taken and the pace has increased.

s9w
I feel like if a software has a rule against using certain smileys - it's not a good sign of stability. Within such a few years so much was lost of the simple and innocent craft of writing software. It's a minefield now. I'm honestly afraid what will come next.
raspie
Can you please explain which of these actually constrain your freedom of expression, with examples?

Do you send kiss emojis to your open source contributors? Call them little b*tches or refer to transgender people by a pronoun you know they are uncomfortable with?

Some corners of tech culture are really toxic, so I understand the need for CoCs. Now, what exactly is the problem with the lines you quoted?

s9w
I'm not sure but I might have sent a (male) coworker an emoji before that could be interpreted as "simulated physical contact". And who knows what made up pronouns some coworkers secretly want to be used.
raquo
You quoted it yourself:

> This includes deliberately referring to someone by a gender that they do not identify with

Key word is deliberately. Secrets not covered.

s9w
Fair enough. I would absolutely avoid someone at work who would force me to use a fantasy pronoun. Luckily these things are not yet common in Germany
Khelavaster
Vile rules. You'll be banned from the community for empathetically saying ":hug:".