I'm also concerned by reports of abuse, harassment, and discrimination in our community, particularly toward women and other underrepresented groups. Even I have experienced harassment and abuse myself. This may be common in the tech industry but it is not OK.
Not, it is not OK. And this entire post could have been written about other languages and other communities. Glad that Andrew is saying this for Go.
It's amazing the abuse people dole out when they are online and behind a keyboard. When I was running the Alan Turing apology campaign in 2009 I received all sorts of hate in my inbox. I wasn't shocked by it because I've been using the Internet since 1986, but I was saddened.
> I'm also concerned by reports of abuse, harassment, and discrimination in our community, particularly toward women and other underrepresented groups. Even I have experienced harassment and abuse myself. This may be common in the tech industry but it is not OK.
I find it hard to imagine other professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants, even other engineering disciplines) behaving like this.
Is that a failure of imagination on my part or is IT/CS particularly toxic?
It could be made worse by the anonymity that is common in our profession. There tend to be trolls in any online forum, regardless of interest, and much of the work in our profession is done via similar channels.
And let's be honest, many of us (myself included) grew up hacking on computers instead of developing typical social skills. Some people grow out of that, some people grow into jerks.
edit: one further thought, there are many cases where someone is a brilliant programmer precisely because they're borderline mentally ill, and that causes some social problems as well.
If you think there is no "abuse, harassment, and discrimination" in the medical, legal, accounting and non-IT engineering professions, you are not paying attention. These are global human problems not restricted to IT/CS.
> But are there death threats, rape threats, doxxing, etc, against total strangers?
These kinds of things are much easier to perpetrate on the Internet, so they are endemic in communities that are mostly Internet-based. That explains their prevalence in the tech community, but note that they occur in many other online communities (see: computer gaming).
Medicine and law both have a fair share of abuse and unprofessional behavior, least of all because of the strict experience hierarchies they tend to impose in their practicing entities.
Failure of imagination, unfortunately. You could look up recent scandals and discussion around Australian surgeons for some examples of pretty terrible behaviour in medicine.
I've spoken to my wife who is a lawyer about this a lot. There are still a lot a abusive lawyers in the world but this abuse has shifted from overt racism/sexism over the years to more subtle forms of abuse and well basically torture. The individuals in question also have to be very high earners or else they are gone quickly and even then quite a lot of them have to move around frequently.
There is also a lot more diversity in those professions these days. That wasn't always the case so it's a good sign we will grow towards that in technology as well.
I'm amazed that an online group whose focus is to talk about a programming language thinks about adopting a code of conduct... I would have thought trying to keep the discussions about the programming language itself would be enough.
Is it some kind of american / californian extreme sensitivity to heated debates or has there been a recent invasion of trolls i'm unaware of ?
Both. American culture has created an image of "harrassment and discrimination" very specific to the US, so a lot of people tend to see it where there is none, and be blind to actual instances of it (The hilarious/sad debate on "discrimination" in the most recent Witcher game comes to mind. Feel free to google it, I will not fuel that fire).
That said, online communities tend to very easily turn elitism into hostility, and hostility into hatefulness. Incredibly toxic. I'm not sure how a code of conduct helps - if you have to spell out to people that they shouldn't be hateful, there's a bigger problem at stake, and the code of conduct is just here to protect the community from wrongdoing, not hostile behaviour.
But hey, it can't actually hurt to have one, so why not. I hope it helps, the cynic in me just doubts it will.
Edit: I see any post discussing the nature of the CoC and not blindly saying "this is awesome! woohoo!" is getting downvoted quite heavily. That's pretty sad, and a great way to encourage people never to speak against the majority (in this case, there is a majority of americans on HN online at this hour). Think about that, for a moment.
> I would have thought trying to keep the discussions about the programming language itself would be enough.
This is actually quite tricky. Policing off-topic in IRC channel is harder than policing abuses.
For a concrete example, Go discussion is often tolerated in #rust IRC channel and I think it should be, but "boobs or gtfo" should not be tolerated. I was actually in the channel when "boobs or gtfo" incident happened, and it was one of reasons for Rust to adopt a code of conduct.
Since the CoCs started to be a thing I always though that they were unnecessary because I growth with the mantra: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
Said that, sadly, this doesn't seem to be a true statement in tech and a CoC doesn't hurt. I am ok with Go getting one if it's going to make people feel more welcomed on the community.
>"do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
So a masochist can hit other people?
I'm joking, but it shows a general issue with that motto: that what a person finds acceptable might not be what others want in a project.
E.g. person X likes seeing cat pictures in HN, and wants other people to post cat pictures. But that doesn't mean that X posting cat pictures would be what the others want too.
For once I actually agree with you, coldtea. It is not enough to rely on everyone's unique instincts and preferences. This is why we need a Code of Conduct.
You're taking a literal reading out of something that's not meant to be literal. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" means treat other people with respect and be nice to them because most people like to be respected and treated nicely. You're right it probably wasn't written 5000 years ago for the extreme case of a person who likes being treated badly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule
I don't feel welcomed. I feel like if I say an offhand comment I'll be attacked. I feel like I could be subject to retro-active harassment campaigns should my relationship with a minority colleague go south due to their own fault.
I don't want to participate in these communities where everything you've ever done is put to the wayside. I don't want to work with people who are so immature they censor and shame opposing thoughts they don't like.
Is "you should, at every opportunity, declare how you can do useful work without generics, and that people asking for them haven't done any real work in Go" in there?
Agree that mis-conduct on the internet is always in poor taste, and also agree that sometimes pointers can help people with some basic tips that make their quest to give or receive help more palatable.
Having said that, I certainly hope that this does not become some sort of thing that people spend a lot of time worrying about, enforcing, or baby sitting others.
For example, the sheer fact that a CoC could exist for go, may mean that people spend time policing rather than programming.
Until reading this I was not aware Rust had a CoC. Can anyone comment on the process that was used to create this, and how its going? Is there recourse for someone that is out of line? Is there human energy spent on policing this?
For me, programming languages shouldn't dictate CoC. However, I think it makes a lot more sense for communities to. So where do you draw the line between community and programming language? Obviously a programming language like C has no central community really. However with Rust and Go and some others there is main IRC channels and more. I just can't help but feel that the forum, IRC network, etc, should be responsible for the CoC. I don't like that Go could end up having a prescribed culture. Some of the most talented C programmers I know are edgy, intolerable people. I would hate for some of their work to get thrown out because they can't be relied on to have a sane discussion 1/2 the time.
What can we really do as community to enforce it at the language level really? I can see someone being banned from a forum. But, what if they don't stop using Golang? Seems like something that is impossible to police.
What prevents someone like linus torvalds from being kicked out for cussing at people? Would linux be where it is today? Those are the type of people I am referring to. Not racist people, for example.
Now I understand that his issues are not the ones that are ultimately the goal of fixing here. But where do you draw the line? And is is the programming languages responsibility to police this?
It's pretty hard to kick Linus out of his own project. That's how he does things and that's what his contributors will apparently put up with. I guess it works for him.
But I don't want to work with people who behave like Linus does (at his worst), regardless of how good they are.
The people who do contribute to the Go core are very talented hackers who also manage to treat each other with respect, so obviously it can be done.
However, this is an interesting discussion. Linus (to my knowledge, please feel free to post evidence otherwise) has not been racist or displayed misogynistic behavior, has he?
So, here you have a very talented indivdual, who is very opinionated and uses some coarse language at times.
While I could also go without the coarse language, he is often right (not saying 100% of the time, but he has earned his reputation) and I would absolutely hate if by adding a CoC you lose people like him.
So, the CoC could clearly articulate that linus-like behavior is ok, and racism is not, it makes it hard to police. Especially when on this very thread, you say you would rather not work with people like that, so then do we add coarse language to the CoC too?
You should read the Django Code Of Conduct before venturing further into this discussion, because what 'enneff is talking about isn't simply harassment.
What they're trying to do is set expectations about decorum and professional courtesy; for instance, if you're on the mailing list or IRC channel and someone asks a question with an "obvious" answer that has been covered 10 times before, how are community participants expected to respond to that?
Lots of communities without codes of conduct get testy, hostile, inhospitable, snarky, or obstreperous when those kinds of things happen, and that makes the community harder to engage with, especially for newcomers.
Thanks for your reply - I will read it. This is something that is interesting to me, and I hope it doesn't come across as I am taking sides - but more asking questions and expressing my first initial fears, given my experience with some engineers who are 'rough around the edges' but are invaluable in their experience.
For the record I am in no way saying I want the community of golang to put up with this stuff. It should even be un-cool to use bad language, and of course completely not-ok-at-all to be racist, or harass people, etc.
I certainly won't stop using go if there is a CoC. I simply hope that it doesn't turn into a framework for people not having thick skin when an someone who does not have a soft approach is giving out useful information.
If it is truly gotten so bad that we have to have that to also have a wider effort of dealing with really bad stuff like racism or harassment then I guess so be it. Maybe my head is in the sand, but I was curious what has happened like this in the go community?
More my bigger question which no one has really commented on, but, why not have this on the go-nuts forum as a CoC for the forum, and have it on the IRC channels?
For example, HN has some guidelines, such as the don't be overly negative thing and what not. So, can communities like email groups, irc, and sites like HN not help our culture along enough?
Curious to hear people's objective thoughts on this. I did some quick research. Django has a pretty elaborate CoC. Python is very brief, and leaves a ton open to interpretation. Ruby on Rails doesn't appear to have one. Ruby does not have one. C does not have one.
What communities has this been a problem in? I have heard of some in Python. Just curious as this is a new issue to me, and being in this industry for 15 years, I have just gotten use to terse people, and have experienced very little harassment or racism. I see articles lately dealing with misogyny, but have yet to have to deal with that fortunately. Possibly, I am just lucky?
> And being in this industry for 15 years, I have experienced very little harassment or racism. I see articles lately dealing with misogyny, but have yet to have to deal with that fortunately. Possibly, I am just lucky?
I think a moment of thought would be enough to conclude that yes, you are just lucky.
I have worked at 3 extremely well known technology companies, 3 start-ups, and had dozens and dozens of consulting projects. I have managed teams between 3 and 40 people, co-ed teams, and have served all kinds of engineering roles. (I simply say this, as I do get around quite a bit, not trying to say anything other than that).
Sure I have seen the occasional issue both online and in real life. But they don't seem specific to a programming language, it's usually one person out of line and the immediate surrounding community (employer, or forum) handles.
Maybe this issue is not as wide-spread as people think? Would love to hear reports of toxicity in the golang community specifically.
Or maybe people are in fear, and this is a preventative action?
We know what the community is like with Linus because we can live it. We don't know if his actions or reputation have pushed away other even more talented people though. We don't even know if a few influential people early on telling him his behaviour was not ok might have changed it completely for the better.
I don't think a lot of Linus' behaviour is ok but he gets away with it because it is so entrenched now.
so, just to be clear, you you would vote for a CoC that would not put up with people that are coarse like linus, even if they do not harass people or engage in worse activities?
On the one hand, I would love if we could change those people, so that they could still contribute, but be better behaved. However, trying to change people is usually not very effective.
But on the other hand, personally, if I had to take the chance to learn something from someone while ignoring what I dislike about them, vs not learning that thing, I would choose to learn it, every time.
Yes I would. You can learn from Linus sure, but you can learn just as effectively from him if he isn't badly behaved. Do you think he acts like that towards his family? Of course not because he knows it isn't acceptable. It's just become acceptable on the lists.
What you can't do because of his bad behaviour is learn from any of the people that have avoided entering the community because of the toxicity. Linus is good but he's not omnipotent. It only takes one person like him becoming acceptable to make a community toxic and kill off any hope of a lot of people entering the space.
You talk about how people just need to grow thicker skins but the truth is they don't. They can just avoid the community and share their talents elsewhere and that is where the true loss comes from.
I wish I had not met so many brilliant people that have the linus attitude. I would say maybe linus influenced them, but they are both on the windows and linux sides.
These people I continue to work with because they have taught me so much. They have been hard on me when I have been wrong and they have mentored me. I certainly would not be where I am if I did not grow thick skin.
However, I would definitely draw the line if I was ever harassed or was in a toxic community. I never got into IRC or Python. Maybe thats the key?
Linux, on the other hand, I don't classify as "toxic", overall, do you? I do occasionally read the LKML ( I don't subscribe ) and I have certainly seem some edgy behavior there, and times I think its overboard. Opinionated? Check. Intimidating? Check. But toxic?
It's really hard to speculate how many people have avoided working with linux because of this. There is certainly other communities such as FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc. They seem to not have anywhere near the traction linux has, which would lean to indicate that what we are talking about did not hinder the success of linux, or prevent people from contributing to it at large.
>I would definitely draw the line if I was ever harassed or was in a toxic community
But it looks like you wouldn't. From what you're saying you would probably just say your skin wasn't thick enough and you needed to toughen up more.
I think the Linux community has been toxic at times. I don't think the whole community is toxic though. It's such a huge ecosystem with lots of people having control of different parts of it though.
If it was just intimidating because it was highly technical than I'd agree with it not being toxic. The fact that it is intimidating because you don't know if someone is going to rip into you and insult you over a misunderstanding is what makes it toxic.
OpenBSD is worse so it's funny you bring it up. Linux is successful despite the negative aspects not because of them. There are thousands of OS(and private) projects and groups that have died or been forked away from because of toxicity.
You and me are very unlikely to be the target of harassment so it's easy for us to miss it or think it is rare. That doesn't mean it's not there.
By your definition of toxic, your absolutely correct. With my definition of toxic, I would.
My definition of toxic includes racism, harassment, and misogyny. I feel like most people agree those are toxic, but I guess it is what else gets added to the list, and is it a suggestion, or something we enforce.
The more things that are enforced, and the bigger this list gets, the more this feels the opposite of simple, and not very go-like.
OpenBSD is also known for having some of the most secure code around.
>, I certainly hope that this does not become some sort of thing that people spend a lot of time worrying about,
Some people already had to spend time worrying about behaviour in the community, as made clear by the references to existing reports of harassment. Making the rest of the community spend some time thinking about it is just sharing the load.
Interesting that I am getting down voted multiple times in this thread. Maybe I don't understand down votes? Definitely trying to be polite here and ask serious questions. Can anyone link me to these, I'm genuinely interested. Thank you.
No, I don't know of any public reports. You could try asking the author of the post for details, but that would be weird - it has a strong overtone of "I don't believe you".
> Until reading this I was not aware Rust had a CoC. Can anyone comment on the process that was used to create this, and how its going?
I don't know how it was created, but my perception is that it's working extremely well. There's a high emphasis in Rust spaces on being friendly and polite, and as a result places like the IRC channels, email lists and other online forums are extremely pleasant spaces, much more so than the average. Even the Rust subreddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/rust) is a very pleasant and polite place; note the permanent link to the CoC at the top.
> The Rust community seems to be populated entirely by human beings. I have no idea how this was done. I suspect Graydon Hoare deserves a large share of the credit for leading by example but everyone I have interacted with in the community has been friendly and patient.
> Having said that, I certainly hope that this does not become some sort of thing that people spend a lot of time worrying about, enforcing, or baby sitting others.
If that is the case, then that precisely proves the usefulness of such a code.
You can't control the way other people act, how delusional are you fools? Online communities have always self-regulated, let nature run its' course and stop interfering, it's pathetic.
I'm sad to see more political correctness invading these circles.
A few years ago, I was so happy to see a girl every now and then at our LUG. Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.
After years of seeing censorship and lives ruined over off-hand comments, I immediately see women instinctually view her as a risk.
Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?
Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently report me for revenge.
Institionalizing political correctness breeds biases and hatred. It's a pressure cooker. You can't even criticize this stuff without being outed as a heretic.
It's not difficult to just treat people like normal humans.
>Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.
This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing them. Were you and the other guys jumping over each other to help every guy that showed up? Why the women? Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?
>Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?
You talk about fear of criticizing this stuff but almost everyone who lives their lives in fear of a sexual discrimination lawsuit do so because they regularly act inappropriately around others.
>Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently report me for revenge.
Sure the woman may put up with your actions for a few months but everyone has a breaking point.
Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you fear for your safety due to these traits. You're like a self fulfilling prophecy. If you ever do end up involved in a lawsuit it likely won't be due to women in general being sneaky or seeking revenge it will likely be due to your belief that they act like that causing you to act negatively towards them.
> This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing them.
Choosing to interpret clumsiness as "abuse" is EXACTLY the problem he's describing. If "jumping over each other to help her" is inappropriate, then someone needs to describe what is appropriate when the group is trying to go out of their way to welcome someone who isn't the group's usual demographic. It is not OK to label everything they do as abusive without explaining what your standard for good behavior would be.
> Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?
And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?
> Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you fear for your safety due to these traits.
Again, stupendously wrong. I think you're twisting his words this way on purpose and it turns my stomach that people are getting away with this.
He's not complaining about "women" being "devious." He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.
There is no question we should treat people with respect. But whether they belong to some minority, or some supposedly aggrieved group, DOES NOT MATTER. A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?
If there's a way you need other people to act in order for you to feel comfortable, fine, you have every right to tell people what those boundaries of yours are. At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.
I'm explaining why it is seen as a negative. Treating that person the same as anyone else is your group is what is appropriate.
>And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?
I don't view all men with suspicion so no. I view men who act like he described with suspicion though.
>He's not complaining about "women" being "devious."
"Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?"
That's actually exactly what he was doing.
>He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.
No group has that ability though. What is happening is he's built up in his mind this boogyman and is letting his fears of it control his actions in such a way that he is actually making himself act in a negative way.
>A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?
Yes, and that is exactly what I said above. He was describing a situation where him and his group were specifically not treating people equally and being upset because his actions in differentiating a person from his group was off putting.
>At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.
The thing is though the community has decided on a set of rules for how people should act to be a part of it. If you can't live by those conventions then fine but you can't complain about being excluded from the community when you don't.
If you find being asked to treat people civilly and equally to be a threat to you then odds are you really need to reevaluate who you are as a person.
No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, everyone is an asshole at different times or acts inappropriately. Being able to recognize that you are in the wrong at those times instead of blaming society is a part of belonging to it though.
> Treating that person the same as anyone else is your group is what is appropriate.
Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."
The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia. It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.
The reason stuff like this scares me is not that I'm accustomed to acting like a troll and don't want to stop. It's because I have spent decades treating everyone I meet with respect, and I now feel I could be punished for a crime I didn't commit at any moment. A good reputation takes a lifetime to build, and in this environment it can be undermined in moments. Now that we seem to be surrounded by people on high alert for signs of thoughtcrime, this asset -- my reputation -- which I've spent a lifetime building is on very thin ice just because my race and sex and politics and gender choices don't intersect with any politically correct victim groups. I don't like it, and I'm not going to just shrink back in fear and say nothing about it.
>Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."
It's the beliefs like that which I am talking about. You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you out. And that all women demand a red carpet rolled out for them or else they will file a claim against you.
>The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia.
Right, like you who is spreading this fear that they have to constantly be on their toes because the women are out to catch them making a mistake so they can ruin your life.
>It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.
The thing is it isn't every man that needs to be reeducated. Most of us are perfectly fine interacting with any gender. But there is definitely a minority that is a problem and changes to cultures are a problem for them because they act inappropriately.
Your fear is imaginary if you act the way you claim. There is no boogyman out to get you.
> You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you out.
You've really got to stop doing that. I've already explained this isn't about women in particular. This is about a culture of guilty-until-proven-innocent in cases where one is being charged with having thoughts or intentions that offend the purveyors of grievance culture. A good example is this very conversation. Your tactic here, over and over again, has been to try and put me on the defensive, as if I have to prove I'm not a sexist.
Just stop it. This is a poisonous way to talk to people. You're only sowing division.
The problem with a Code of Conduct is that for it to have any meaning, it needs to be enforced--someone has to kick out repeat offenders, otherwise the code is just words. For this reason, having a code that reflects "what we aspire to," rather than "don't do this," is laudable, but probably not workable. At some point, I believe, you have to state consequences for specific actions.
As long as it is only about trying to get people to think about what they are saying that seems ok, but I suspect it will only degrade into a pitchfork mob on most occasions.
Really as others have suggested the only required "rule" is: talk about programming.
72 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 127 ms ] threadNot, it is not OK. And this entire post could have been written about other languages and other communities. Glad that Andrew is saying this for Go.
It's amazing the abuse people dole out when they are online and behind a keyboard. When I was running the Alan Turing apology campaign in 2009 I received all sorts of hate in my inbox. I wasn't shocked by it because I've been using the Internet since 1986, but I was saddened.
Seems like a pretty broad generalization.
I have noticed because I've had it reported to me directly. I wasn't aware of it before then.
Also it is not a "generalization". These are isolated incidents but they are harmful to the people involved.
I find it hard to imagine other professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants, even other engineering disciplines) behaving like this.
Is that a failure of imagination on my part or is IT/CS particularly toxic?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
And let's be honest, many of us (myself included) grew up hacking on computers instead of developing typical social skills. Some people grow out of that, some people grow into jerks.
edit: one further thought, there are many cases where someone is a brilliant programmer precisely because they're borderline mentally ill, and that causes some social problems as well.
But are there death threats, rape threats, doxxing, etc, against total strangers?
Serious question. I just haven't heard of that, except perhaps in the military and police.
These kinds of things are much easier to perpetrate on the Internet, so they are endemic in communities that are mostly Internet-based. That explains their prevalence in the tech community, but note that they occur in many other online communities (see: computer gaming).
There is also a lot more diversity in those professions these days. That wasn't always the case so it's a good sign we will grow towards that in technology as well.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2015/05/25/4239823.ht...
Is it some kind of american / californian extreme sensitivity to heated debates or has there been a recent invasion of trolls i'm unaware of ?
That said, online communities tend to very easily turn elitism into hostility, and hostility into hatefulness. Incredibly toxic. I'm not sure how a code of conduct helps - if you have to spell out to people that they shouldn't be hateful, there's a bigger problem at stake, and the code of conduct is just here to protect the community from wrongdoing, not hostile behaviour.
But hey, it can't actually hurt to have one, so why not. I hope it helps, the cynic in me just doubts it will.
Edit: I see any post discussing the nature of the CoC and not blindly saying "this is awesome! woohoo!" is getting downvoted quite heavily. That's pretty sad, and a great way to encourage people never to speak against the majority (in this case, there is a majority of americans on HN online at this hour). Think about that, for a moment.
Yes, this pretty much nails it.
This is actually quite tricky. Policing off-topic in IRC channel is harder than policing abuses.
For a concrete example, Go discussion is often tolerated in #rust IRC channel and I think it should be, but "boobs or gtfo" should not be tolerated. I was actually in the channel when "boobs or gtfo" incident happened, and it was one of reasons for Rust to adopt a code of conduct.
Said that, sadly, this doesn't seem to be a true statement in tech and a CoC doesn't hurt. I am ok with Go getting one if it's going to make people feel more welcomed on the community.
So a masochist can hit other people?
I'm joking, but it shows a general issue with that motto: that what a person finds acceptable might not be what others want in a project.
E.g. person X likes seeing cat pictures in HN, and wants other people to post cat pictures. But that doesn't mean that X posting cat pictures would be what the others want too.
Don't do to others what they don't want to be done to them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Platinum_Rule_(Golden_Rule...
I don't want to participate in these communities where everything you've ever done is put to the wayside. I don't want to work with people who are so immature they censor and shame opposing thoughts they don't like.
How is that welcoming?
Having said that, I certainly hope that this does not become some sort of thing that people spend a lot of time worrying about, enforcing, or baby sitting others.
For example, the sheer fact that a CoC could exist for go, may mean that people spend time policing rather than programming.
Until reading this I was not aware Rust had a CoC. Can anyone comment on the process that was used to create this, and how its going? Is there recourse for someone that is out of line? Is there human energy spent on policing this?
For me, programming languages shouldn't dictate CoC. However, I think it makes a lot more sense for communities to. So where do you draw the line between community and programming language? Obviously a programming language like C has no central community really. However with Rust and Go and some others there is main IRC channels and more. I just can't help but feel that the forum, IRC network, etc, should be responsible for the CoC. I don't like that Go could end up having a prescribed culture. Some of the most talented C programmers I know are edgy, intolerable people. I would hate for some of their work to get thrown out because they can't be relied on to have a sane discussion 1/2 the time.
What can we really do as community to enforce it at the language level really? I can see someone being banned from a forum. But, what if they don't stop using Golang? Seems like something that is impossible to police.
Hear! Hear!
Now I understand that his issues are not the ones that are ultimately the goal of fixing here. But where do you draw the line? And is is the programming languages responsibility to police this?
Where is the CoC for C anyways:) ?
But I don't want to work with people who behave like Linus does (at his worst), regardless of how good they are.
The people who do contribute to the Go core are very talented hackers who also manage to treat each other with respect, so obviously it can be done.
However, this is an interesting discussion. Linus (to my knowledge, please feel free to post evidence otherwise) has not been racist or displayed misogynistic behavior, has he?
So, here you have a very talented indivdual, who is very opinionated and uses some coarse language at times.
While I could also go without the coarse language, he is often right (not saying 100% of the time, but he has earned his reputation) and I would absolutely hate if by adding a CoC you lose people like him.
So, the CoC could clearly articulate that linus-like behavior is ok, and racism is not, it makes it hard to police. Especially when on this very thread, you say you would rather not work with people like that, so then do we add coarse language to the CoC too?
Thoughts?
What they're trying to do is set expectations about decorum and professional courtesy; for instance, if you're on the mailing list or IRC channel and someone asks a question with an "obvious" answer that has been covered 10 times before, how are community participants expected to respond to that?
Lots of communities without codes of conduct get testy, hostile, inhospitable, snarky, or obstreperous when those kinds of things happen, and that makes the community harder to engage with, especially for newcomers.
For the record I am in no way saying I want the community of golang to put up with this stuff. It should even be un-cool to use bad language, and of course completely not-ok-at-all to be racist, or harass people, etc.
I certainly won't stop using go if there is a CoC. I simply hope that it doesn't turn into a framework for people not having thick skin when an someone who does not have a soft approach is giving out useful information.
If it is truly gotten so bad that we have to have that to also have a wider effort of dealing with really bad stuff like racism or harassment then I guess so be it. Maybe my head is in the sand, but I was curious what has happened like this in the go community?
More my bigger question which no one has really commented on, but, why not have this on the go-nuts forum as a CoC for the forum, and have it on the IRC channels?
For example, HN has some guidelines, such as the don't be overly negative thing and what not. So, can communities like email groups, irc, and sites like HN not help our culture along enough?
Curious to hear people's objective thoughts on this. I did some quick research. Django has a pretty elaborate CoC. Python is very brief, and leaves a ton open to interpretation. Ruby on Rails doesn't appear to have one. Ruby does not have one. C does not have one.
What communities has this been a problem in? I have heard of some in Python. Just curious as this is a new issue to me, and being in this industry for 15 years, I have just gotten use to terse people, and have experienced very little harassment or racism. I see articles lately dealing with misogyny, but have yet to have to deal with that fortunately. Possibly, I am just lucky?
I think a moment of thought would be enough to conclude that yes, you are just lucky.
I have worked at 3 extremely well known technology companies, 3 start-ups, and had dozens and dozens of consulting projects. I have managed teams between 3 and 40 people, co-ed teams, and have served all kinds of engineering roles. (I simply say this, as I do get around quite a bit, not trying to say anything other than that).
Sure I have seen the occasional issue both online and in real life. But they don't seem specific to a programming language, it's usually one person out of line and the immediate surrounding community (employer, or forum) handles.
Maybe this issue is not as wide-spread as people think? Would love to hear reports of toxicity in the golang community specifically.
Or maybe people are in fear, and this is a preventative action?
People in general don't think it is. Anglosaxons do.
I don't think a lot of Linus' behaviour is ok but he gets away with it because it is so entrenched now.
On the one hand, I would love if we could change those people, so that they could still contribute, but be better behaved. However, trying to change people is usually not very effective.
But on the other hand, personally, if I had to take the chance to learn something from someone while ignoring what I dislike about them, vs not learning that thing, I would choose to learn it, every time.
What you can't do because of his bad behaviour is learn from any of the people that have avoided entering the community because of the toxicity. Linus is good but he's not omnipotent. It only takes one person like him becoming acceptable to make a community toxic and kill off any hope of a lot of people entering the space.
You talk about how people just need to grow thicker skins but the truth is they don't. They can just avoid the community and share their talents elsewhere and that is where the true loss comes from.
I wish I had not met so many brilliant people that have the linus attitude. I would say maybe linus influenced them, but they are both on the windows and linux sides.
These people I continue to work with because they have taught me so much. They have been hard on me when I have been wrong and they have mentored me. I certainly would not be where I am if I did not grow thick skin.
However, I would definitely draw the line if I was ever harassed or was in a toxic community. I never got into IRC or Python. Maybe thats the key?
Linux, on the other hand, I don't classify as "toxic", overall, do you? I do occasionally read the LKML ( I don't subscribe ) and I have certainly seem some edgy behavior there, and times I think its overboard. Opinionated? Check. Intimidating? Check. But toxic?
It's really hard to speculate how many people have avoided working with linux because of this. There is certainly other communities such as FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc. They seem to not have anywhere near the traction linux has, which would lean to indicate that what we are talking about did not hinder the success of linux, or prevent people from contributing to it at large.
But it looks like you wouldn't. From what you're saying you would probably just say your skin wasn't thick enough and you needed to toughen up more.
I think the Linux community has been toxic at times. I don't think the whole community is toxic though. It's such a huge ecosystem with lots of people having control of different parts of it though.
If it was just intimidating because it was highly technical than I'd agree with it not being toxic. The fact that it is intimidating because you don't know if someone is going to rip into you and insult you over a misunderstanding is what makes it toxic.
OpenBSD is worse so it's funny you bring it up. Linux is successful despite the negative aspects not because of them. There are thousands of OS(and private) projects and groups that have died or been forked away from because of toxicity.
You and me are very unlikely to be the target of harassment so it's easy for us to miss it or think it is rare. That doesn't mean it's not there.
By your definition of toxic, your absolutely correct. With my definition of toxic, I would.
My definition of toxic includes racism, harassment, and misogyny. I feel like most people agree those are toxic, but I guess it is what else gets added to the list, and is it a suggestion, or something we enforce.
The more things that are enforced, and the bigger this list gets, the more this feels the opposite of simple, and not very go-like.
OpenBSD is also known for having some of the most secure code around.
I, on the other hand, am all for it.
I can't stand working with PC people though...
Some people already had to spend time worrying about behaviour in the community, as made clear by the references to existing reports of harassment. Making the rest of the community spend some time thinking about it is just sharing the load.
I don't know how it was created, but my perception is that it's working extremely well. There's a high emphasis in Rust spaces on being friendly and polite, and as a result places like the IRC channels, email lists and other online forums are extremely pleasant spaces, much more so than the average. Even the Rust subreddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/rust) is a very pleasant and polite place; note the permanent link to the CoC at the top.
http://scattered-thoughts.net/blog/2015/06/04/three-months-o... summed it up beautifully:
> The Rust community seems to be populated entirely by human beings. I have no idea how this was done. I suspect Graydon Hoare deserves a large share of the credit for leading by example but everyone I have interacted with in the community has been friendly and patient.
If that is the case, then that precisely proves the usefulness of such a code.
A few years ago, I was so happy to see a girl every now and then at our LUG. Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.
After years of seeing censorship and lives ruined over off-hand comments, I immediately see women instinctually view her as a risk.
Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?
Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently report me for revenge.
Institionalizing political correctness breeds biases and hatred. It's a pressure cooker. You can't even criticize this stuff without being outed as a heretic.
>Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.
This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing them. Were you and the other guys jumping over each other to help every guy that showed up? Why the women? Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?
>Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?
You talk about fear of criticizing this stuff but almost everyone who lives their lives in fear of a sexual discrimination lawsuit do so because they regularly act inappropriately around others.
>Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently report me for revenge.
Sure the woman may put up with your actions for a few months but everyone has a breaking point.
Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you fear for your safety due to these traits. You're like a self fulfilling prophecy. If you ever do end up involved in a lawsuit it likely won't be due to women in general being sneaky or seeking revenge it will likely be due to your belief that they act like that causing you to act negatively towards them.
Choosing to interpret clumsiness as "abuse" is EXACTLY the problem he's describing. If "jumping over each other to help her" is inappropriate, then someone needs to describe what is appropriate when the group is trying to go out of their way to welcome someone who isn't the group's usual demographic. It is not OK to label everything they do as abusive without explaining what your standard for good behavior would be.
> Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?
And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?
> Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you fear for your safety due to these traits.
Again, stupendously wrong. I think you're twisting his words this way on purpose and it turns my stomach that people are getting away with this.
He's not complaining about "women" being "devious." He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.
There is no question we should treat people with respect. But whether they belong to some minority, or some supposedly aggrieved group, DOES NOT MATTER. A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?
If there's a way you need other people to act in order for you to feel comfortable, fine, you have every right to tell people what those boundaries of yours are. At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.
>And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?
I don't view all men with suspicion so no. I view men who act like he described with suspicion though.
>He's not complaining about "women" being "devious."
"Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?"
That's actually exactly what he was doing.
>He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.
No group has that ability though. What is happening is he's built up in his mind this boogyman and is letting his fears of it control his actions in such a way that he is actually making himself act in a negative way.
>A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?
Yes, and that is exactly what I said above. He was describing a situation where him and his group were specifically not treating people equally and being upset because his actions in differentiating a person from his group was off putting.
>At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.
The thing is though the community has decided on a set of rules for how people should act to be a part of it. If you can't live by those conventions then fine but you can't complain about being excluded from the community when you don't.
If you find being asked to treat people civilly and equally to be a threat to you then odds are you really need to reevaluate who you are as a person.
No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, everyone is an asshole at different times or acts inappropriately. Being able to recognize that you are in the wrong at those times instead of blaming society is a part of belonging to it though.
Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."
The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia. It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.
The reason stuff like this scares me is not that I'm accustomed to acting like a troll and don't want to stop. It's because I have spent decades treating everyone I meet with respect, and I now feel I could be punished for a crime I didn't commit at any moment. A good reputation takes a lifetime to build, and in this environment it can be undermined in moments. Now that we seem to be surrounded by people on high alert for signs of thoughtcrime, this asset -- my reputation -- which I've spent a lifetime building is on very thin ice just because my race and sex and politics and gender choices don't intersect with any politically correct victim groups. I don't like it, and I'm not going to just shrink back in fear and say nothing about it.
It's the beliefs like that which I am talking about. You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you out. And that all women demand a red carpet rolled out for them or else they will file a claim against you.
>The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia.
Right, like you who is spreading this fear that they have to constantly be on their toes because the women are out to catch them making a mistake so they can ruin your life.
>It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.
The thing is it isn't every man that needs to be reeducated. Most of us are perfectly fine interacting with any gender. But there is definitely a minority that is a problem and changes to cultures are a problem for them because they act inappropriately.
Your fear is imaginary if you act the way you claim. There is no boogyman out to get you.
You've really got to stop doing that. I've already explained this isn't about women in particular. This is about a culture of guilty-until-proven-innocent in cases where one is being charged with having thoughts or intentions that offend the purveyors of grievance culture. A good example is this very conversation. Your tactic here, over and over again, has been to try and put me on the defensive, as if I have to prove I'm not a sexist.
Just stop it. This is a poisonous way to talk to people. You're only sowing division.
Really as others have suggested the only required "rule" is: talk about programming.