On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:01:42 +0200
"Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <metux@???> wrote:

> On 01.10.2018 07:28, Taiidan@??? wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > On 09/27/2018 05:11 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
> >> I'm that Social Justice Warrior that you don't like.
> >
> > I can almost guarantee you aren't.
> >
> > There is a big difference between being for social justice which any
> > reasonable person is, and being a SJW.
>
> I can follow this way of thinking ... we should be careful not get
> into conflicts by just different interpretation of some terminology.
>
> I've seen a lot of self-declared 'social justice warriors', who
> finally did more harm than anything useful. Those who really did many
> good things, tend to not calling themselves that way.
>
> These CoC issues remind me to things happening in other (eg. the
> political) field. For example here in Germany (in other European
> countries, too) certain movements try to establish certain CoCs to
> most areas of daily life, that just shall prohibit them from speaking
> their mind, eg.:
>
> * people against abortion shall be banned/silenced, as they're
> discriminating women.
> * people against gay marriage shall be banned/silenced, as they're
> discriminating gays.
> * people against child marriage shall be banned/silenced, as they're
> discriminating certain religions / cultures.
> * people who speak about crimal immigrants or refugees shall be
> banned/ silenced, as they're discriminating them
> * people who speak about costs of immigration shall be banned/silenced
> as they're discriminating immigrants
> * people who differenciate between immigrants and refugees shall be
> banned/silenced, as they're discriminating refuguees

You could just have said:
* people against <something> shall be banned/silenced, as they're
discriminating/against <something>.

Instead of that long list.

>
> Those demands usually come from 'leftist' groups (mostly beaurocrats,

Most bureaucrats are, in my opinion, rightist

> who never contributed anything actually useful, heavily sponsored by
> multi-billionares) who try to take over the whole society (smells like
> a 2nd wave of the 68'ers, who turned our schools into indoctrination
> camps). And the very same people applaude to officials and party
> leaders who openly spill anti-white or anti-German racism - eg. the
> "bomber- harris-do-it-again"-faction" (remember: Arthur Harris was a
> very brutal war criminal, who deliberately slaughtered at least a
> million civilians)

This totally depends on your point of view, it could be said that
Harris was just responding to things like the Blitz, the V1 and V2 etc,
You also have to accept it was a part of the largest war this world has
ever seen.

>
> With that background, things like 'CoC's make my alarm bells ring very
> louldly. Of course, I don't believe that any of the kernel maintainers
> belong to those groups. But it feels they might be somewhat under
> some 'social pressure'.

A CoC shouldn't be needed, ever.

>
> A practical look on the actual text:
>
> * they're trying to introduce a kind of legal system into a tech
> project
> * the text is so extremly vague, that it just isn't usable for any
> serious legal purpose. given enough phantasy, one can interpret
> anything into it. therefore: great chance of failing the original
> good intent, and high risk of abuse
>
> And the argument, the maintainers will take good decisions anyways,
> isn't pro the CoC - actually it's a very strong con. Because, if it's
> really the case (IMHO, indeed had been so for the last decades), this
> codex isn't needed at all - it's been obsolete decades before it's
> inception. Instead it's just introducing new, completely unnecessary
> conflicts.
>
> The whole purpose of any codex is a formalization of social rules,
> that aren't followed automatically the responsible people, and are
> neutral on the personal views of the individuals who're subjected to
> it or have to execute/enforce it. Just intended to control those
> individuals who do not inherently follow the unwritten moral rules.
> Anything else would be just destructive bureaucracy or even a
> social/legal weapon.
>
> If these FOSS projects really wanted to establish a properly working
> CoC, they'd also need to establish their own complete legal system,
> including lawmakers, courts, police. Is that really the goal ?

You know what, that sounds very like what the EU is trying to become,
thank your deity we are getting out of it.

Rowland