Seriously? The next point is “love your juniors” so what you are saying shouldn’t happen. But then again... I think loving your juniors usually ends up with HR.

Ah, but the original Latin has iuniores diligere, that's means "esteem highly", "regard with affection" & so on. Instead you have these age and gender silos in American society, and the silly sex jokes and the Pence Rule, it's worrisome for anyone who has to navigate through it.

What on earth are you talking about? Can you rephrase in a way that a reasonable person can follow?

Iuniores diligere can mean 'love the juniors' but I suspect St. Benedict used the verb 'diligo' in one of its other meanings:

diligo: love, distinguish by choosing, regard above others, esteem highly, value, prize. Romantic love is 'amo' in latin (and Italian), St. Benedict is not telling you to get into problems with HR when loving anyone.

Iuniores means just what it says, 'the younger' so 'iuniores diligere' does mean 'love the younger' and as such fits perfectly in whatever 'age silo' doctrine you want Americans to accuse of professing. There is no mention of gender at all, nor do Pence or sex jokes come into play here.

love !== respect.

love == respect

I love my brother, but I don't respect him (most of the time), since he's a bit of dork. I still love him, because of our relationship, the shared experiences and the knowledge he'd be here when I need him.

I respect my boss, because she's my senior, she is a good leader and a competent dev in her own right. But I don't love her.

I love peanut butter.

Ah, but it doesn't state you should love those of equal age or standing - depending on how you interpret 'junior' and 'senior' so there is still some room for complaints here.

Not serious, of course, if any 'CoC' is needed I'd say "just behave" or "do not do unto others what you wouldn't have done upon yourself" should suffice. Rule #9 in the Rule of St. Benedict already states something similar, now just get rid of the rest and you're done.

While you are correct that “respect people” is a better general purpose rule, you are throwing out the baby with the bath water: experience is valuable.

I didn't say ignore senior opinions. I said don't ignore juniors.

Did you miss the rule about loving your juniors?

Love !== respect.

Yes it does; you have a fundamental misunderstanding of one, the other, or both

Pretty much any dictionary on the planet will disagree with you.

But then, so does basic logic. But I mean, we're debating an open source project that has adopted a Code of Conduct, with point one demanding that contributors believe in a superstitious all powerful being.

We're way past fucking logic here aren't we.

If there is value in this semantic quibbling you have failed to illustrate it.

The technology industry is rife with ageism. There isn't nearly as much outrage about it as there should be.

I agree. Giving someone undue respect just because they're old is ageism. Some old people never really grew up and are still jerks (I plan on being one of them; getting my grumpy on).

Respect everyone.

Senior in this context probably means superiors. Someone has to look the original Latin version up.