Regarding CoC

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
76 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Rob Dixon
SQLite lost a lot of credibility with a lot of people over this stunt. I
know you think it doesn’t matter, but SQLite is a brand- this tarnishes
that brand and makes life more difficult for those of us who need to
justify using it to project stakeholders. If it is a serious CoC,
stakeholders see a red flag because they don’t want tech held hostage by
perceived religious fanatics. If it is a joke stakeholders think the tech
itself is unprofessional. It’s a lose-lose situation, and I’m wondering if
taking on a culture of vapid CoCs worth tarnishing your brand name over?

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 9:29 AM Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/22/18, Chris Brody <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> Looks like that happened this morning.
> >> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530
> >
> > I saw it coming, tried to warn you guys in private.
>
> There is indeed a reactionary hate mob forming on twitter.  But most
> of the thoughtful commentators have been supportive, even if they
> disagree with the particulars of our CoC, They total get that we are
> not being exclusive, but rather setting a standard of behavior for
> participation in the SQLite community.
>
> I have tried to make that point clear in the preface to the CoC, that
> we have no intention of enforcing any particular religious system on
> anybody, and that everyone is welcomed to participate in the community
> regardless of ones religious proclivities.  The only requirement is
> that while participating in the SQLite community, your behavior not be
> in direct conflict with time-tested and centuries-old Christian
> ethics.  Nobody has to adhere to a particular creed.  Merely
> demonstrate professional behavior and all is well.
>
> Many detractors appear to have not read the preface, or if they read
> it, they did not understand it.  This might be because I have not
> explained it well.  The preface has been revised, months ago, to
> address prior criticism from the twitter crowd.  I think the current
> preface is definitely an improvement over what was up at first.  But,
> there might be ways of improving it further.  Thoughtful suggestions
> are welcomed.
>
> So the question then arises:  If strict adherence to the Rule of St.
> Benedict is not required, why even have a CoC?
>
> Several reasons:  First, "professional behavior" is ill-defined.  What
> is professional to some might be unprofessional to others.  The Rule
> attempts to clarify what "professional behavior" means.  When I was
> first trying to figure out what CoC to use (under pressure from
> clients) I also considered secular sources, such as Benjamin
> Franklin's 13 virtues (http://www.thirteenvirtues.com/) but ended up
> going with the Instruments of Good Works from St. Benedict's Rule as
> it provide more examples.
>
> Secondly, I view a CoC not so much as a legal code as a statement of
> the values of the core developers.  All current committers to SQLite
> approved the CoC before I published it.  A single dissent would have
> been sufficient for me to change course.  Taking down the current CoC
> would not change our values, it would merely obscure them.  Isn't it
> better to be open and honest about who we are?
>
> Thirdly, having a written CoC is increasingly a business requirement.
> (I published the currrent CoC after two separate business requested
> copies of our company CoC.  They did not say this was a precondition
> for doing business with them, but there was that implication.) There
> has been an implicit code of conduct for SQLite from the beginning,
> and almost everybody has gotten along with it just fine.  Once or
> twice I have had to privately reprove offenders, but those are rare
> exceptions.  Publishing the current CoC back in February is merely
> making explicit what has been implicit from the beginning.  Nothing
> has really changed.  I did not draw attention to the CoC back in
> February because all I really needed then was a hyperlink to send to
> those who were specifically curious.
>
> So then, why not use a more modern CoC?  I looked at that too, but
> found the so-called "modern" CoCs to be vapid.  They are trendy
> feel-good statements that do not really get to the heart of the matter
> in the way the the ancient Rule does.  By way of analogy, I view
> modern CoCs as being like pop music - selling millions of copies today
> and completely forgotten next year.  I prefer something more enduring,
> like Mozart.
>
> One final reason for publishing the current CoC is as a preemptive
> move, to prevent some future customer from imposing on us one of those
> modern CoCs that I so dislike.
>
> In summary: The values expressed by the current CoC have been
> unchanged for decades and will not be changing as we move forward.  If
> some people are uncomfortable with those values, then I am very sorry
> for them, but that does not change the fact.  On the other hand, I am
> open to suggestions on how to express those values in a way that
> modern twitter-ites can better understand, so do not hesitate to speak
> up if you have a plan.
> --
> D. Richard Hipp
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

David Raymond
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
For feedback from one more random person on the internet: I'll let you know that the CoC as it currently stands, along with your reasoning below, brings a smile to my face and restores a small bit of faith in humanity to my heart.


-----Original Message-----
From: sqlite-users [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 11:29 AM
To: SQLite mailing list
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Regarding CoC

On 10/22/18, Chris Brody <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Looks like that happened this morning.
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530
>
> I saw it coming, tried to warn you guys in private.

There is indeed a reactionary hate mob forming on twitter.  But most
of the thoughtful commentators have been supportive, even if they
disagree with the particulars of our CoC, They total get that we are
not being exclusive, but rather setting a standard of behavior for
participation in the SQLite community.

I have tried to make that point clear in the preface to the CoC, that
we have no intention of enforcing any particular religious system on
anybody, and that everyone is welcomed to participate in the community
regardless of ones religious proclivities.  The only requirement is
that while participating in the SQLite community, your behavior not be
in direct conflict with time-tested and centuries-old Christian
ethics.  Nobody has to adhere to a particular creed.  Merely
demonstrate professional behavior and all is well.

Many detractors appear to have not read the preface, or if they read
it, they did not understand it.  This might be because I have not
explained it well.  The preface has been revised, months ago, to
address prior criticism from the twitter crowd.  I think the current
preface is definitely an improvement over what was up at first.  But,
there might be ways of improving it further.  Thoughtful suggestions
are welcomed.

So the question then arises:  If strict adherence to the Rule of St.
Benedict is not required, why even have a CoC?

Several reasons:  First, "professional behavior" is ill-defined.  What
is professional to some might be unprofessional to others.  The Rule
attempts to clarify what "professional behavior" means.  When I was
first trying to figure out what CoC to use (under pressure from
clients) I also considered secular sources, such as Benjamin
Franklin's 13 virtues (http://www.thirteenvirtues.com/) but ended up
going with the Instruments of Good Works from St. Benedict's Rule as
it provide more examples.

Secondly, I view a CoC not so much as a legal code as a statement of
the values of the core developers.  All current committers to SQLite
approved the CoC before I published it.  A single dissent would have
been sufficient for me to change course.  Taking down the current CoC
would not change our values, it would merely obscure them.  Isn't it
better to be open and honest about who we are?

Thirdly, having a written CoC is increasingly a business requirement.
(I published the currrent CoC after two separate business requested
copies of our company CoC.  They did not say this was a precondition
for doing business with them, but there was that implication.) There
has been an implicit code of conduct for SQLite from the beginning,
and almost everybody has gotten along with it just fine.  Once or
twice I have had to privately reprove offenders, but those are rare
exceptions.  Publishing the current CoC back in February is merely
making explicit what has been implicit from the beginning.  Nothing
has really changed.  I did not draw attention to the CoC back in
February because all I really needed then was a hyperlink to send to
those who were specifically curious.

So then, why not use a more modern CoC?  I looked at that too, but
found the so-called "modern" CoCs to be vapid.  They are trendy
feel-good statements that do not really get to the heart of the matter
in the way the the ancient Rule does.  By way of analogy, I view
modern CoCs as being like pop music - selling millions of copies today
and completely forgotten next year.  I prefer something more enduring,
like Mozart.

One final reason for publishing the current CoC is as a preemptive
move, to prevent some future customer from imposing on us one of those
modern CoCs that I so dislike.

In summary: The values expressed by the current CoC have been
unchanged for decades and will not be changing as we move forward.  If
some people are uncomfortable with those values, then I am very sorry
for them, but that does not change the fact.  On the other hand, I am
open to suggestions on how to express those values in a way that
modern twitter-ites can better understand, so do not hesitate to speak
up if you have a plan.
--
D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Klaus Maas
In reply to this post by Chris Brody
Funny world that one needs a code of contact to be considered civilized.

No need to defend your CoC.

I see it as a non-exhaustive list of values important to the developers.

That they are Christian-based gives some context for their interpretation.

Can't see any fault in that.

I may or may not share some/all/any of these values, but I should
respect their significance for the developers.

Klaus
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 22/10/2018 18.32, Chris Brody wrote:

> I would vote for a major simplification, down to something like "love
> thy neighbor", "do unto others as ...", or "don't do unto others as
> ..."
>
> For reference:
> *https://www.simpletoremember.com/jewish/blog/loving-thy-neighbor-judaism/
> *https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+5%3A14&version=KJV
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:26 PM Simon Slavin<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 1:19pm, Richard Hipp<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like that happened this morning.
>>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530
>> It also hit Reddit, in /r/programming.  Currently 239 comments:
>>
>> <https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9qedai/sqlite_adopts_new_code_of_conduct/>
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sqlite-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Don V Nielsen
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
I really feel for you, DRH. You tried covering all the bases,
unfortunately, you going to get tagged out at everyone because everybody is
referee and they all follow their own rules.This goes straight to your
first point, "What is professional to some might be unprofessional to
others." This akin to people saying, "What good is religion because I am a
good person." Oh, yah? By whose measure? Their own. And that measure varies
from person to person. You reached to higher higher authority through St
Benedictine. But others don't agree with the authority. So they are going
to insist that it gets thrown out because they don't agree.

Your third point is the heart of the problem, "having a written CoC is
increasingly a business requirement". I read this as, "you felt the
pressure from significant businesses". Being global opens a wasps nest. We
all have to be inclusive, but all groups demand recognition. In plain
English, "You are damned if you do and damned if you don't." In the end,
you cannot win this.

IMO, you're best bet is to fold your hand and keep your chips you have in
front of you. You have made your feelings known. For those who have read
the CoC and share in your community, we will accept CoC changes that
eliminate those elements others are insulted by. That's just who we are.
But we know where they came from.

Lastly, props to Rowan Worth. "> 23. Do not nurse a grudge. ::sigh:: DROP
TABLE grudges; I was amassing such a good collection :(" Totally awesome
comment. I wish there was a like button for that.

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:29 AM Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/22/18, Chris Brody <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> Looks like that happened this morning.
> >> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18273530
> >
> > I saw it coming, tried to warn you guys in private.
>
> There is indeed a reactionary hate mob forming on twitter.  But most
> of the thoughtful commentators have been supportive, even if they
> disagree with the particulars of our CoC, They total get that we are
> not being exclusive, but rather setting a standard of behavior for
> participation in the SQLite community.
>
> I have tried to make that point clear in the preface to the CoC, that
> we have no intention of enforcing any particular religious system on
> anybody, and that everyone is welcomed to participate in the community
> regardless of ones religious proclivities.  The only requirement is
> that while participating in the SQLite community, your behavior not be
> in direct conflict with time-tested and centuries-old Christian
> ethics.  Nobody has to adhere to a particular creed.  Merely
> demonstrate professional behavior and all is well.
>
> Many detractors appear to have not read the preface, or if they read
> it, they did not understand it.  This might be because I have not
> explained it well.  The preface has been revised, months ago, to
> address prior criticism from the twitter crowd.  I think the current
> preface is definitely an improvement over what was up at first.  But,
> there might be ways of improving it further.  Thoughtful suggestions
> are welcomed.
>
> So the question then arises:  If strict adherence to the Rule of St.
> Benedict is not required, why even have a CoC?
>
> Several reasons:  First, "professional behavior" is ill-defined.  What
> is professional to some might be unprofessional to others.  The Rule
> attempts to clarify what "professional behavior" means.  When I was
> first trying to figure out what CoC to use (under pressure from
> clients) I also considered secular sources, such as Benjamin
> Franklin's 13 virtues (http://www.thirteenvirtues.com/) but ended up
> going with the Instruments of Good Works from St. Benedict's Rule as
> it provide more examples.
>
> Secondly, I view a CoC not so much as a legal code as a statement of
> the values of the core developers.  All current committers to SQLite
> approved the CoC before I published it.  A single dissent would have
> been sufficient for me to change course.  Taking down the current CoC
> would not change our values, it would merely obscure them.  Isn't it
> better to be open and honest about who we are?
>
> Thirdly, having a written CoC is increasingly a business requirement.
> (I published the currrent CoC after two separate business requested
> copies of our company CoC.  They did not say this was a precondition
> for doing business with them, but there was that implication.) There
> has been an implicit code of conduct for SQLite from the beginning,
> and almost everybody has gotten along with it just fine.  Once or
> twice I have had to privately reprove offenders, but those are rare
> exceptions.  Publishing the current CoC back in February is merely
> making explicit what has been implicit from the beginning.  Nothing
> has really changed.  I did not draw attention to the CoC back in
> February because all I really needed then was a hyperlink to send to
> those who were specifically curious.
>
> So then, why not use a more modern CoC?  I looked at that too, but
> found the so-called "modern" CoCs to be vapid.  They are trendy
> feel-good statements that do not really get to the heart of the matter
> in the way the the ancient Rule does.  By way of analogy, I view
> modern CoCs as being like pop music - selling millions of copies today
> and completely forgotten next year.  I prefer something more enduring,
> like Mozart.
>
> One final reason for publishing the current CoC is as a preemptive
> move, to prevent some future customer from imposing on us one of those
> modern CoCs that I so dislike.
>
> In summary: The values expressed by the current CoC have been
> unchanged for decades and will not be changing as we move forward.  If
> some people are uncomfortable with those values, then I am very sorry
> for them, but that does not change the fact.  On the other hand, I am
> open to suggestions on how to express those values in a way that
> modern twitter-ites can better understand, so do not hesitate to speak
> up if you have a plan.
> --
> D. Richard Hipp
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Peter da Silva-2
You would have had more luck with "Be excellent to each other".
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

R Smith-2
In reply to this post by Simon Slavin-3

On 2018/10/22 7:09 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> If you're not going to accept those rules, in exactly the translation used, you might as well pick something entirely different.
>
> Simon.

Indeed. Further to this, as I understand a CoC, it's basically the core
entity informing whomever be so interested, how he/she/they aim to
conduct themselves in the fulfillment of duties or business.

I do not think it proscribes or prescribes to anyone else.

For me, speaking as the avid Atheist I am, the specific rule-set in
question is weird, but it also provides a great picture into the core
devs' feelings of what's right, and that they will do the "right" thing
in general, by the average understanding of the word "right" among most
current philosophies - and I imagine that's really all they wished to say.

To add to that, if there is one thing we (as free thinkers) hold in
highest regard, it's not being forced to do anything; not being
commanded; not having to bend to another will or doctrine. So I say keep
it.



PS: I could never comply with rule 63.  :)


_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

J Decker
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:22 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2018/10/22 7:09 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
> >
> > If you're not going to accept those rules, in exactly the translation
> used, you might as well pick something entirely different.
> >
> > Simon.
>
> Indeed. Further to this, as I understand a CoC, it's basically the core
> entity informing whomever be so interested, how he/she/they aim to
> conduct themselves in the fulfillment of duties or business.
>
> I do not think it proscribes or prescribes to anyone else.
>
> For me, speaking as the avid Atheist I am, the specific rule-set in
> question is weird, but it also provides a great picture into the core
> devs' feelings of what's right, and that they will do the "right" thing
> in general, by the average understanding of the word "right" among most
> current philosophies - and I imagine that's really all they wished to say.
>
> To add to that, if there is one thing we (as free thinkers) hold in
> highest regard, it's not being forced to do anything; not being
> commanded; not having to bend to another will or doctrine. So I say keep
> it.
>

59.  Fulfill not the desires of the flesh; hate your own will.
:)

>
>
>
> PS: I could never comply with rule 63.  :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:22 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2018/10/22 7:09 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
> >
> > If you're not going to accept those rules, in exactly the translation
> used, you might as well pick something entirely different.
> >
> > Simon.
>
> Indeed. Further to this, as I understand a CoC, it's basically the core
> entity informing whomever be so interested, how he/she/they aim to
> conduct themselves in the fulfillment of duties or business.
>
> I do not think it proscribes or prescribes to anyone else.
>
> For me, speaking as the avid Atheist I am, the specific rule-set in
> question is weird, but it also provides a great picture into the core
> devs' feelings of what's right, and that they will do the "right" thing
> in general, by the average understanding of the word "right" among most
> current philosophies - and I imagine that's really all they wished to say.
>
> To add to that, if there is one thing we (as free thinkers) hold in
> highest regard, it's not being forced to do anything; not being
> commanded; not having to bend to another will or doctrine. So I say keep
> it.
>
>
>
> PS: I could never comply with rule 63.  :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Rob Dixon
In reply to this post by R Smith-2
Thank you Simon, I will. SQL compact will do just fine for me. Funny, I
used to advocate for using SQLite. Now that I know more about the people
involved with it, I want nothing do to with it. Best of luck being weird
and antagonistic.

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 1:22 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2018/10/22 7:09 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
> >
> > If you're not going to accept those rules, in exactly the translation
> used, you might as well pick something entirely different.
> >
> > Simon.
>
> Indeed. Further to this, as I understand a CoC, it's basically the core
> entity informing whomever be so interested, how he/she/they aim to
> conduct themselves in the fulfillment of duties or business.
>
> I do not think it proscribes or prescribes to anyone else.
>
> For me, speaking as the avid Atheist I am, the specific rule-set in
> question is weird, but it also provides a great picture into the core
> devs' feelings of what's right, and that they will do the "right" thing
> in general, by the average understanding of the word "right" among most
> current philosophies - and I imagine that's really all they wished to say.
>
> To add to that, if there is one thing we (as free thinkers) hold in
> highest regard, it's not being forced to do anything; not being
> commanded; not having to bend to another will or doctrine. So I say keep
> it.
>
>
>
> PS: I could never comply with rule 63.  :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Petite Abeille-2


> On Oct 22, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Rob Dixon <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> weird and antagonistic

Thank you for the kind words of support. Your wisdom and insights will be missed. Farewell Rob Dixon. Godspeed.

_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Charles Leifer
I dig the new CoC (not that anyone's counting).

I'll share my comment from HN:

If the code of conduct angers you, stop and think -- how did you feel one
minute before you read the CoC? Is the problem really the CoC, or is it
your collection of beliefs that is causing the problem? Furthermore, are
you even affected? Do you contribute bug reports or patches? Follow the
SQLite mailing list? Is anything here designed to prevent you from
continuing to do so?

SQLite's author is a spiritual guy. There's nothing wrong with him
borrowing from spiritual sources to describe his ideal for how he wants the
SQLite community to conduct itself.

...

Also, how can you tell if someone's an atheist?

Haha, don't worry friend, they'll be sure to tell you.

Keep up the amazing work, SQLite team. The good tree bears the good fruit,
and man SQLite is some good fruit.

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:49 PM Petite Abeille <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>
>
> > On Oct 22, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Rob Dixon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > weird and antagonistic
>
> Thank you for the kind words of support. Your wisdom and insights will be
> missed. Farewell Rob Dixon. Godspeed.
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Donald Shepherd
It's disappointing that some are using discussion on a (perfectly
acceptable) CoC to turn it into an excuse to post "jokes" about other
people's beliefs, but whatever floats your boat.

Regards,
Donald Shepherd.

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 07:05, Charles Leifer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I dig the new CoC (not that anyone's counting).
>
> I'll share my comment from HN:
>
> If the code of conduct angers you, stop and think -- how did you feel one
> minute before you read the CoC? Is the problem really the CoC, or is it
> your collection of beliefs that is causing the problem? Furthermore, are
> you even affected? Do you contribute bug reports or patches? Follow the
> SQLite mailing list? Is anything here designed to prevent you from
> continuing to do so?
>
> SQLite's author is a spiritual guy. There's nothing wrong with him
> borrowing from spiritual sources to describe his ideal for how he wants the
> SQLite community to conduct itself.
>
> ...
>
> Also, how can you tell if someone's an atheist?
>
> Haha, don't worry friend, they'll be sure to tell you.
>
> Keep up the amazing work, SQLite team. The good tree bears the good fruit,
> and man SQLite is some good fruit.
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:49 PM Petite Abeille <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 22, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Rob Dixon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > weird and antagonistic
> >
> > Thank you for the kind words of support. Your wisdom and insights will be
> > missed. Farewell Rob Dixon. Godspeed.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sqlite-users mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Ned Fleming
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
On 2018-10-22 10:29 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:

>
> In summary: The values expressed by the current CoC have been
> unchanged for decades and will not be changing as we move forward.  If
> some people are uncomfortable with those values, then I am very sorry
> for them, but that does not change the fact.  On the other hand, I am
> open to suggestions on how to express those values in a way that
> modern twitter-ites can better understand, so do not hesitate to speak
> up if you have a plan.
>

The CoC is fine. Don't change it.

We live in a world of offended mobs. The mobs use twitter. Twitter is
the cloaca of the Internet -- an open, running sewer. The sewer runs to
a cesspool and, as in any cesspool, the largest chunks rise to the top.
You can't reason with these chatterboxes, so don't try. Soon, this minor
pool will dry up and the mob will move on to a new outrage. Outrage for
outrage's sake. There's always a new enemy to smash in a show of force.

--
Ned
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Richard Hipp-3
In reply to this post by Simon Slavin-3
On 10/19/18, Simon Slavin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's gonna magically appear on Hacker News within the month.  For
> those curious ...

It even made TheRegister:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/22/sqlite_code_of_conduct/

--
D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Simon Slavin-3
On 22 Oct 2018, at 10:05pm, Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It even made TheRegister:
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/22/sqlite_code_of_conduct/

And now has reached the summit of Slashdot's front page:

<https://developers.slashdot.org/story/18/10/22/2034211/sqlite-adopts-monastic-code-of-conduct>

Simon.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Petite Abeille-2
In reply to this post by Donald Shepherd


> On Oct 22, 2018, at 10:32 PM, Donald Shepherd <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> It's disappointing

Why so serious? Plus, really, what have the romans ever done for us?
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Petite Abeille-2
In reply to this post by Simon Slavin-3


> On Oct 22, 2018, at 11:31 PM, Simon Slavin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> And now has reached the summit of Slashdot's front page:

Slow news day. Good night, and good luck.

_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

D Burgess
> The CoC is fine. Don't change it.
+1
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Jim Dossey-2
I think Donald Knuth would approve.

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:01 PM D Burgess <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > The CoC is fine. Don't change it.
> +1
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Paul
If my opinion has any value, even though being atheist, I prefer this CoC 100 times over
the CoC that is being currently pushed onto the many open-source communities, that was
created by some purple-headed feminist with political motives. This one does not have
any hidden intentions (at least, it seems so to me, knowing that you're honest person).


23 October 2018, 03:47:29, by "Jim Dossey" <[hidden email]>:

> I think Donald Knuth would approve.
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:01 PM D Burgess <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > > The CoC is fine. Don't change it.
> > +1
> > _______________________________________________
> > sqlite-users mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Regarding CoC

Philip Warner
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
I'm guessing this is an appropriately satirical response to a ridiculous request
from corporates. If not, then:

- ditch all the religious mumbo-jumbo: 1, 10, 21, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 49, 50,
58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 70, 72

- and probably the masochism: 11

- and probably "Do not swear, for fear of perjuring yourself"...which read like
"don't commit to anything".

in short...go for something simpler. "Don't be evil" worked pretty well for me,
not sure why Google dropped it, except of course they presumably planned to be
evil, or they had difficulty telling the difference any more.




_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
1234