Yes. Obviously this.

Like who? Especially in the context we're talking about of online communities.

Here's the thing. We have people like the OP claiming they're for free speech and market forces. Except you know when private companies do something to enforce their own guidelines the OPs of the world bitch and moan about oppression, censorship, and un-Americanness.

When the people being harassed stand up and organize and pressure organizations to be more responsible (you know a core aspect of a free market system) people like the OP bitch and moan about it.

So far the only actual concrete action that's acceptable to the OP is the victims running away and hiding.

Edit: And just for context for those that don't know me - I spent a lot of effort arguing for and modding a forum here on 2+2 with the explicit goal of doing very little moderating of content and allowing racist/sexist/crazy people post almost anything they wanted to.

1. confront them, instruct them that it will not be tolerated. 2. if that doesn't work, gtfo and go somewhere with better people. if you were harassed, what would you do?

what is wrong with you, that you are trying to twist my intention? never once did i attempt to protect any harasser.

i did however attempt to protect innocent people from the self-entitled, lifelong "victims" who throw out accusations at whatever whim they fancy. so save all the games for someone else

and my opinion is that a code of conduct will not reduce this. in both cases, with or without the code, the "victim" will bring the issue up with management, and the management will probably speak to both parties and make a decision. however, having the code in place, with the current ambiguities, opens up an avenue for blatant abuse of the code

Yah I've yet to see a way to measure it but I'm guessing you're right.

Do you need an example to agree with false claims ruin lives, maybe I do or don't have one on the particular context to give to you. Yet, I've never understood the mentality of measuring two things that are both wrong with numbers and expect swaying favour of one deserving more attention, respect, concern or whatever. It irks me somewhat because there are many things wrong in this world because of that mentality.

The problem iosys is that the attitude that 'false accusations' are as prevalent or worse than real accusations leads to worse outcomes for the real victims.

It leads people to fight against the measures that are helpful for the majority of victims.

This isn't a case of 'why are you donating to a charity for animals when we still have starving humans'.

Lol Greg. You want people to stand up to their harassers and then you turn around and call them self entitled and yadda yadda for doing exactly that.

I mean let's come full circle. GitHub, a private company, has come up with rules they're going to use and which they're advocating for other people. You come on here and act like this is some massive outrage. Why? If you don't like the way they work, just go somewhere else. Don't participate. Stop acting like the victim and go somewhere where you're free to act like a dick to every programmer that you think isn't up to your standards.

github is free to do whatever they want. i've already conceded that maintainers (and private companies) should take action and that the intent is in the right place. and i'm free to criticize the actions they've taken.

you chose to ignore my comments regarding the fact that the code will not lessen any harassment, but that it does open up a huge can of worms allowing people to blindly accuse people of wrongs real or imagined

i think you're mistaking the target of my gripe, or i just haven't been clear. i have no problem with the maintainers or companies. i'm talking about the same thing as iosys is talking about. i'm not calling github self-entitled. i'm calling some false accusers that. the problem i have is with the serial victims who never take responsibility for their lot in life, and like to throw out blame and accusations whenever they don't get their way. these people are more and more prevalent in society, and these attempts at political correctness only perpetuate their actions. they never have to face reality, because they get defense from 1. other sympathizers, 2. the media who can claim "victim blaming" against any one who speaks out about it, and 3. codes/laws/rules like these

Idk, I can think of cases not relating to OPs topic, where both victims of harassment or accused have committed suicide.
The outcomes are both equal but it doesn't really matter because numbers win in society.

There is no way both of the following are true:

1. Makes no difference for actual harassment.

2. Leads to increased false accusations.

I mean, your position makes absolutely no logical sense.

And yes, in the current climate it does make a difference to have organizations clearly state where they stand on these issues. The more it becomes clear that sexism and other forms of online harassment are unacceptable the better off we'll be

so, i guess you are saying that previously, the impression was that harassment was acceptable? or that there was doubt and no clarity on that stance? good thing we have the codes then! might want to change the wording though

anyway, this is going nowhere.

Yes. I'm saying that. Hell, you're basically saying it too by not focusing on getting rid of harassers and instead telling people that are harassed to go find a different community to be a part of.

Think of this as the welcome sign to those people that don't want to tolerate bigots and *******s.

Lolololol

Instruct them that harassment won't be tolerated? Isn't your whole point in this thread that action against harassment is bad? That it should be tolerated? Who exactly is not tolerating harassment in your version of this?

2 is exactly what I said, where people who are harassed are the problem and they, the harasses, need to leave, not the people doing the harassing.

What kind of ass backwards way of living is this?

no, none of that is my point, i have no idea where you're pulling that from. feel free to reread my posts. no wonder why this has devolved into such a cluster ****

i never said the people who are harassed are the problem. and yes the harassers should be the ones who leave. you seem to think i'm defending the people doing the harassing. i've made no mention of any legitimate cases of harassment. they are irrelevant to the discussion

you ppl can continue to fabricate things that i havent said but thats why this goes nowhere.

You've said multiple times that the people being harassed should leave.

It's not fair using the words he's said as some kind of measure of what he's said.

woah. what do you mean you people?

I feel triggered

These discussions go the same way whether it's about race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

People don't like to think of themselves as bigoted so they come up with poorly thought out and illogical arguments to try and rationalize what they want to happen. Other people point out how flawed the arguments are and the original person tries to go through mental gymnastics to try and justify what they've said without saying any of the things they know society has decided are wrong to say explicitly.

Look at the author of that link posted in the OP. The title is 'Why the Github code of conduct isn't for me'. Then people point out a bunch of problems with what he's saying and he backtracks to 'oh I don't really have a problem with it, I'm just recommending a little tweak'.

yes, if all else fails. i'm just saying you've always got an option. you get harassed, you bring it up with the person and/or with the management, hopefully it gets resolved. obviously, no one in this thread thinks that that recourse will work, since apparently harassment is acceptable in the current state. so, since bringing it up will fail in our current state of acceptable bigotry, then you STILL have the option of leaving.

you're a valued contributor1 to a project which uses the code of conduct, you say something to contributor2. #2 takes offense and accuses you of some nonsense that was not intended at all. by the code of conduct, youre guilty by default.

the point is that these codes do little to prevent the harassment, but they sure open up a lot of room for false accusations

what do YOU mean by you people?!

The code of conduct isn't making the decision for itself. The maintainer still is. So like I said before if you're going to get booted you have to offend at least the person claiming harassment and the maintainer. All this does is give people some more guidelines for how they should act.



Why are you so afraid of false accusations? How many people have you seen have problems brought along themselves by false accusations related to this sort of stuff? Dr Matt Taylor is one a lot of people bring up and he admitted the shirt could be seen in the wrong light, apologized and that was it. Almost everyone was back on side with him again.

Every other case I've seen has been someone claiming that the harassed over reacted while not denying what they'd done. That isn't a false accusation mate, that is the accused not recognizing their own actions.

Judging from your past comments you're afraid that you won't be able to make off colour jokes/sayings anymore without consequences. That isn't you being attacked or falsely accused either. That is people calling you out on something that you are doing that is wrong. You are admitting it is wrong or else you wouldn't have pointed out that they were controversial.

Where does the code of conduct declare someone guilty by default?

And once again, how can it be both useless for actual harassment and also really easy for false accusations. That makes no sense.

right i understand that. but that same process would take effect whether or not the codes were in place. so why add something that offers little benefit, but has definite negatives? obv jj sees a big benefit in these codes because according to him, currently bigotry and harassment is a standard accepted policy, so in that case, they are def necessary. and perhaps you think the negatives are negligible, and then thats your opinion, and fine if so.

i saw a story the other day how a man was accused of rape years ago, and the accuser finally admits she made the whole thing up. the man only lost 50 years of his life. no big deal. there's a reason we have 'innocent until proven guilty', because its ultimately better that an innocent person isn't unjustly convicted at the expense few crimes slipping through. unless you think you're smarter than not only the forefathers who conceived of this concept, but also any and everyone after who has critically considered it and upheld its importance. the judicial system failed in that case, but its not a foolproof system when you have human jurors who are subject to sympathy, media, and political correctness

obviously my example above is extreme but the principle is the same. libel is a real danger. how are you gonna get your next job when you were fired from the previous one for harassment (that you didn't commit)? how do you face your family when you have to tell them you were fired for harassment? i wouldn't be surprised if iosys cited a suicide case. there is tangible value in a person's reputation.

well that just comes down to perception. but, if a real example was presented, i may even agree with you. i'm sure what you say isn't uncommon

i'm not afraid of that, because thats not my goal. i'm not trying to rally to win favor so that i can continue to make fun of people. of course i expected backlash when i made this thread. probably most now think i'm an idiot. thats my consequences. ok, i will live with that. it would be quite childish and transparent if my entire intention was to get some personal benefit. i couldn't care less about myself. but seeing another person wronged does upset me, both if someone is wrongly accused, or wrongly harassed (even though you don't believe that). this code opens up much greater possibility of the former while not doing much for the latter

Since Greg obviously won't explain himself, could someone else take a crack at explaining this to me?

I've pretty much given up. He's admitted he recognizes there is a problem, he's admitted something needs to be done for it, he's admitted that the code of conducts can work against harassment but he still wants to argue so he keeps adding new points. It's gotten to the stage where he isn't arguing against codes of conduct he is arguing against imaginary boogymen.