Regarding CoC

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

Re: Regarding CoC

Stefan Evert-3

> On 23 Oct 2018, at 07:04, Paul <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 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).

Exactly my feelings.

– Stefan

_______________________________________________
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

Michael Falconer
>
> I found code of conduct in documentation and I was wondering if it were
> true. Checking the version history it appears to have been added on
> 2018-02-22.
>

Sure that publishing date wasn't 2018-04-01?

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 08:02, Stefan Evert <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > On 23 Oct 2018, at 07:04, Paul <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > 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).
>
> Exactly my feelings.
>
> – Stefan
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>


--
Regards,
     Michael.j.Falconer.
_______________________________________________
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

Kevin Youren
In reply to this post by Mantas Gridinas
Richard,

thank you for your further explanation of your team's Code of Conduct.

After a bit of research on the Internet, everything makes sense.

Well done.

regs,

Kev



_______________________________________________
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

Jonathan Moules-3
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
I think the big problem with this CoC is that it triggers Poe's Law -
it's impossible to tell if it's serious or a joke without further
context. I know I spent a good 10 minutes trying to decide either way
when I first saw this thread a few days ago; now I know from the below
post that it's serious.

The consequence of this is that a good chunk of the criticism out there
is because people think it's a joke and treat it accordingly. Some more
clarification in the opening paragraph on the reasoning behind it and
it's non-jokey nature - as below - would probably ameliorate this
component of the CoC's contentiousness.


On 2018-10-22 16:29, Richard Hipp 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.


_______________________________________________
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

wmertens
I think a lot of confusion could have been avoided by putting the text of
the CoC in a separate box, and for extra effect use a parchment paper
background, something like the Papyrus font and write the rules in Ye Olde
English.

Right now it looks as if the rules were written specifically for sqlite and
only by reading the preface closely is it clear what's what.

Wout.


On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:01 PM Jonathan Moules <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think the big problem with this CoC is that it triggers Poe's Law -
> it's impossible to tell if it's serious or a joke without further
> context. I know I spent a good 10 minutes trying to decide either way
> when I first saw this thread a few days ago; now I know from the below
> post that it's serious.
>
> The consequence of this is that a good chunk of the criticism out there
> is because people think it's a joke and treat it accordingly. Some more
> clarification in the opening paragraph on the reasoning behind it and
> it's non-jokey nature - as below - would probably ameliorate this
> component of the CoC's contentiousness.
>
>
> On 2018-10-22 16:29, Richard Hipp 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Chris Locke-3
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
> 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

Probably via selfie, with a duckface, together with your evening meal in
the background.


On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 4:30 PM 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

Dominique Devienne
In reply to this post by wmertens
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:10 PM Wout Mertens <[hidden email]> wrote:

> [...] write the rules in Ye Olde English. [..]
>

He was "Italian", and more likely to write in Latin, not English, old or
new.
The SQLite doc is English only because that's DRH native tong (I assume).
Lets not pretend the rules are from English origin please. --DD
_______________________________________________
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

Jan Danielsson
On 2018-10-24 13:42, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:10 PM Wout Mertens <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> [...] write the rules in Ye Olde English. [..]
>
> He was "Italian", and more likely to write in Latin, not English, old or
> new.
> The SQLite doc is English only because that's DRH native tong (I assume).

   Minor point, but I don't think the English translation is used merely
because of drh's native tongue; it also happens to be a good choice to
use English on the Internet so as many people as possible can read it.

> Lets not pretend the rules are from English origin please. --DD

   I don't think that was what Wout meant.  Read "Ye Olde English" as
"Aesthetically 'old'", not "use the original".  Point was merely to give
some visual clues to the reader that "the original is very old", since
it's clear a lot of people aren't reading the first part of the
document.  And again, English is a good choice to reach as many as possible.

--
Kind Regards,
Jan
_______________________________________________
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

wmertens
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:55 PM Jan Danielsson <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> > Lets not pretend the rules are from English origin please. --DD
>
>    I don't think that was what Wout meant.  Read "Ye Olde English" as
> "Aesthetically 'old'", not "use the original".  Point was merely to give
> some visual clues to the reader that "the original is very old", since
> it's clear a lot of people aren't reading the first part of the
> document.  And again, English is a good choice to reach as many as
> possible.
>

Indeed.

Suppose drh would have referred to some ancient Buddhist or Hindu document,
then I think there wouldn't be as much complaining. In early hacker
culture, there is much referencing to koans

The Christian outlook is however very familiar to most readers here, and
has connotations of bible-thumpers and meddling. If I wanted to buy an
ice-cream and some angry bible-belter would only sell it if I promise to
repent and whatnot, I would certainly forgo the purchase. I think this is
what some people are imagining.

Adding more easy-to-grasp context to the CoC would help IMHO.

Wout.
_______________________________________________
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

Jens Alfke-2
In reply to this post by Paul


> On Oct 22, 2018, at 10:04 PM, Paul <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 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.

As a purple-headed feminist (yes, literally; got it dyed last week, though the color is subtle) I am rolling my eyes at this.
I haven’t see any CoC with political motives being “pushed” to open-source communities. The ones I’ve seen basically boil down to Be Excellent Unto One Another, similarly to SQLite’s. The difference is that they go into _specifics_. And why do they do that? Because of many incidents of harassment/discrimination against people of specific minority [in the geek community] groups.

Vague blanket statements like “Don’t be evil” or “Be excellent to each other” don’t work (here or anywhere else.) *Everyone* believes they’re good, *everyone* believes they’re doing good, everyone believes that when they get snarky or take action against someone, that it’s because the *other person* deserved it, or maybe that it was just in fun and the other person shouldn’t be so sensitive. Even the [insert name of horrible group that committed atrocities] felt that way.

Since DRH got this CoC from a Christian monastic order, allow me to give an example: another order, the Dominicans, instigated and led some rather horrific acts of mass torture, murder and ethnic cleansing over the centuries (e.g. the Spanish Inquisition.) I’m sure that Savonarola felt himself to be a good person who was doing the right thing. (Of course, the same goes for horrifically evil people who were devout followers of other religions, and of course atheists. Only Disney villains actually believe they’re evil.)

Being specific is important. If you think it’s some kind of crazy political extremism to prohibit harassment based on race, religion, gender or sexual orientation, I can’t help you there, but just try to keep in mind that the majority of people do think so and have asked that you not do it. At least they have on other sites; I can’t tell about this one, because the original author of the CoC certainly felt it was OK, and I don’t know what DRH’s motives were for reproducing his words verbatim.

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

Re: Regarding CoC

dmp
In reply to this post by Mantas Gridinas
Code Of Conduct, misplaced disposition on the individuals of
an organization rather than the results of their work on
intent.

I have had a simple statement with my open source software
downloads for years.

"Dandy Made Productions would like to assure individuals that
 any applications downloaded from this site are free from any
 malicious code as so created. Great pride is taken in trying
 to create ethical software that does not knowingly modify, or
 change files or a system's configuration beyond the user's
 request. In addition no software downloaded from this site
 performs any type of monitoring or reporting on the user's
 behavior in use of said application. Every reasonable attempt
 is made to maintain the integrity of the downloaded software
 packages at this site."

Dana M. Proctor

_______________________________________________
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

Stephen Chrzanowski
I like this.

If I were to use this (And I don't expect I'll ever have to since I
typically write just for me) the only addition I'd make to this is about
the reporting.

From a users perspective, if the utility has something to report "home"
with (lets say crash reports), it'd have to be ABUNDANTLY clear and written
on the tin that the software has the capability to do so, and CLEARLY give
the option to view exactly what is being transmitted, and never in an
automated way without users consent. ... unlike...
https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Windows10-BSOD-640x353.jpg


On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:28 PM dmp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Code Of Conduct, misplaced disposition on the individuals of
> an organization rather than the results of their work on
> intent.
>
> I have had a simple statement with my open source software
> downloads for years.
>
> "Dandy Made Productions would like to assure individuals that
>  any applications downloaded from this site are free from any
>  malicious code as so created. Great pride is taken in trying
>  to create ethical software that does not knowingly modify, or
>  change files or a system's configuration beyond the user's
>  request. In addition no software downloaded from this site
>  performs any type of monitoring or reporting on the user's
>  behavior in use of said application. Every reasonable attempt
>  is made to maintain the integrity of the downloaded software
>  packages at this site."
>
> Dana M. Proctor
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

R Smith-2

On 2018/10/24 8:19 PM, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
> ..// without users consent. ... unlike...
> https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Windows10-BSOD-640x353.jpg

How did you take a screenshot while Windows was hanging/recovering?

I call foul!

(Or is that a new Windows 10 feature?)


_______________________________________________
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

Brian Chrzanowski
Probably a virtual machine.

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 2:27 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2018/10/24 8:19 PM, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
> > ..// without users consent. ... unlike...
> >
> https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Windows10-BSOD-640x353.jpg
>
> How did you take a screenshot while Windows was hanging/recovering?
>
> I call foul!
>
> (Or is that a new Windows 10 feature?)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Mantas Gridinas
Or a capture card.

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 21:28 Brian Chrzanowski <[hidden email]
wrote:

> Probably a virtual machine.
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 2:27 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 2018/10/24 8:19 PM, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
> > > ..// without users consent. ... unlike...
> > >
> >
> https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Windows10-BSOD-640x353.jpg
> >
> > How did you take a screenshot while Windows was hanging/recovering?
> >
> > I call foul!
> >
> > (Or is that a new Windows 10 feature?)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

Jonathan Moules-3
In reply to this post by Jens Alfke-2
The one I usually see as being referred to as being "political" is the
Contributor Covenant -
https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct

 From reading it, while it does have some specifics, it has all the
exact same problems you're highlighting "Don't be evil" has. Why?
Because it includes huge loopholes which are extremely subjective and
based on whoever is interpreting the rules:

"Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a
professional setting"

"Project maintainers are responsible for clarifying the standards of
acceptable behavior[sic]"

And more potential retroactive changing of the rules: "Representation of
a project may be further defined and clarified by project maintainers."

There's also this gem: "The use of sexualized language or imagery and
unwelcome sexual attention or advances" - so by implication sexual
attention/advances are fine as long as they're welcome?

While the SQLite CoC definitely fails at the religious inclusiveness
component, as far as I can see it's better in most other ways. It's
certainly more specific, there are no giant loopholes, it doesn't stop
at "unwanted" advances ("chastity" is one of the rules), and with the
ethos heading at the top, it's clear that it's only really interested in
keeping things positive rather than going on witchhunts. I still prefer
"be excellent", but SQLite could do worse, and I say all that as
egalitarian atheist.


On 2018-10-24 16:17, Jens Alfke wrote:

>
>> On Oct 22, 2018, at 10:04 PM, Paul <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
> As a purple-headed feminist (yes, literally; got it dyed last week, though the color is subtle) I am rolling my eyes at this.
> I haven’t see any CoC with political motives being “pushed” to open-source communities. The ones I’ve seen basically boil down to Be Excellent Unto One Another, similarly to SQLite’s. The difference is that they go into _specifics_. And why do they do that? Because of many incidents of harassment/discrimination against people of specific minority [in the geek community] groups.
>
> Vague blanket statements like “Don’t be evil” or “Be excellent to each other” don’t work (here or anywhere else.) *Everyone* believes they’re good, *everyone* believes they’re doing good, everyone believes that when they get snarky or take action against someone, that it’s because the *other person* deserved it, or maybe that it was just in fun and the other person shouldn’t be so sensitive. Even the [insert name of horrible group that committed atrocities] felt that way.
>
> Since DRH got this CoC from a Christian monastic order, allow me to give an example: another order, the Dominicans, instigated and led some rather horrific acts of mass torture, murder and ethnic cleansing over the centuries (e.g. the Spanish Inquisition.) I’m sure that Savonarola felt himself to be a good person who was doing the right thing. (Of course, the same goes for horrifically evil people who were devout followers of other religions, and of course atheists. Only Disney villains actually believe they’re evil.)
>
> Being specific is important. If you think it’s some kind of crazy political extremism to prohibit harassment based on race, religion, gender or sexual orientation, I can’t help you there, but just try to keep in mind that the majority of people do think so and have asked that you not do it. At least they have on other sites; I can’t tell about this one, because the original author of the CoC certainly felt it was OK, and I don’t know what DRH’s motives were for reproducing his words verbatim.
>
> —Jens
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Michael Falconer
In reply to this post by Mantas Gridinas
Oh dear,

it's all gone.......while my devout atheism is generally pleased my
somewhat annoying 'free will, free speech ' ethic has rust on it! Richard,
it's your joint and it's such a good place, friendly and mostly respectful.
My atheism was NOT offended in any way by all that God speak and I do
support the notion that you are perfectly entitled to have a CoC and for it
to take whatever form you feel appropriate. But I'm an honest guy and will
unsub if my un-godliness is just totally unacceptable, but I'll still be
using SQLite!

On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 06:10, Mantas Gridinas <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Or a capture card.
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 21:28 Brian Chrzanowski <[hidden email]
> wrote:
>
> > Probably a virtual machine.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 2:27 PM R Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On 2018/10/24 8:19 PM, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
> > > > ..// without users consent. ... unlike...
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Windows10-BSOD-640x353.jpg
> > >
> > > How did you take a screenshot while Windows was hanging/recovering?
> > >
> > > I call foul!
> > >
> > > (Or is that a new Windows 10 feature?)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>


--
Regards,
     Michael.j.Falconer.
_______________________________________________
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
On 10/24/18, Michael Falconer <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> it's all gone.......while my devout atheism is generally pleased my
> somewhat annoying 'free will, free speech ' ethic has rust on it! Richard,
> it's your joint and it's such a good place, friendly and mostly respectful.
> My atheism was NOT offended in any way by all that God speak and I do
> support the notion that you are perfectly entitled to have a CoC and for it
> to take whatever form you feel appropriate. But I'm an honest guy and will
> unsub if my un-godliness is just totally unacceptable, but I'll still be
> using SQLite!
>

My original CoC is still there.  It just changed its filename.
https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html

If you read the original CoC closely, you will find things that
required me to change it.  We have:

  18. Be a help in times of trouble
  19. Console the sorrowing
  31. Love your enemies
  34. Be not proud
  71. Make peace with your adversary before the sun sets

Regardless of whether they are right or wrong, some people were
troubled with the Benedictine Rule being called a "Code of Conduct".
It turns out that the term "Code of Conduct" has special significance
to some communities, and if you misuse the term, it causes emotional
distress. If I can relieve that sorrow without compromising my own
values, isn't it right to do so?  It took me several days and
countless hours reading enraged tweets to figure this out, but in the
end, the solution was as simple as renaming the offensive "Code of
Conduct" to "Code of Ethics", thus avoiding the
name-of-special-significance, then drop in a pre-packaged CoC in place
of the one that became the CoE, and all is well.  Took less than 5
minutes once I figured out what to do.  Who know it was that easy?

--
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

wmertens
See, this is where I miss being able to non-intrusively add a heart emoji
to your post. Here it is anyway: ❤

Wout.

On Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 12:11 AM Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/24/18, Michael Falconer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > it's all gone.......while my devout atheism is generally pleased my
> > somewhat annoying 'free will, free speech ' ethic has rust on it!
> Richard,
> > it's your joint and it's such a good place, friendly and mostly
> respectful.
> > My atheism was NOT offended in any way by all that God speak and I do
> > support the notion that you are perfectly entitled to have a CoC and for
> it
> > to take whatever form you feel appropriate. But I'm an honest guy and
> will
> > unsub if my un-godliness is just totally unacceptable, but I'll still be
> > using SQLite!
> >
>
> My original CoC is still there.  It just changed its filename.
> https://sqlite.org/codeofethics.html
>
> If you read the original CoC closely, you will find things that
> required me to change it.  We have:
>
>   18. Be a help in times of trouble
>   19. Console the sorrowing
>   31. Love your enemies
>   34. Be not proud
>   71. Make peace with your adversary before the sun sets
>
> Regardless of whether they are right or wrong, some people were
> troubled with the Benedictine Rule being called a "Code of Conduct".
> It turns out that the term "Code of Conduct" has special significance
> to some communities, and if you misuse the term, it causes emotional
> distress. If I can relieve that sorrow without compromising my own
> values, isn't it right to do so?  It took me several days and
> countless hours reading enraged tweets to figure this out, but in the
> end, the solution was as simple as renaming the offensive "Code of
> Conduct" to "Code of Ethics", thus avoiding the
> name-of-special-significance, then drop in a pre-packaged CoC in place
> of the one that became the CoE, and all is well.  Took less than 5
> minutes once I figured out what to do.  Who know it was that easy?
>
> --
> 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

Philip Warner
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
On 25/10/2018 9:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> If you read the original CoC closely, you will find things that
> required me to change it.  We have:
>
>    18. Be a help in times of trouble
>    19. Console the sorrowing
>    31. Love your enemies
>    34. Be not proud
>    71. Make peace with your adversary before the sun sets

lol...hoist and petard etc. Nice change. You broke the ethics again tho...you
made me laugh: "Speak no useless words or words that move to laughter".

I'm glad it says "follow spirit of The Rule to the best of their ability" since
it means I can interpret it as I like, and ignore anything I am unable to agree
with. Not sure that's ideal for any ethical code, but it means I can at least
ignore all the god-stuff, masochism, starving, alcohol prohibition etc. And I do
love a good grudge, so I'll hang on to my best ones. And my addiction to wine.
The media "keep death daily before your eyes", so I can ignore that one as well.
I don't have a spiritual mentor, so I guess I will just talk to my dogs
more....which leads me to a possibility...replace "God" with "Dog"...that fixes
a few more of them.


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