Re:Open Letter to the Linux Foundation
by quantummkv on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:27PM
(#21485802)
> Yes. Though, most CoC violations are handled privately
That really sounds like abuse of power with extra steps. Either ALL of these violations should be private or NONE of them should be. Selectively enforcing something like this is just bias and vendetta politics
Re:Open Letter to the Linux Foundation
by young_unixer on Friday November 08, 2019 @06:36PM
(#21488105)
I think that a reasonable code would allow the punished party to publicly disclose their punishment, otherwise the punishers (for lack of a better term) would do whatever they wanted. But it should be private by default.
So maybe the expected outcome is merging of HR-SJW positions and NDA-CoC so that "everyone" can feel safe
I believe that many CoC violations would include private events which the victim would like to keep private. After all, there's a good reason why we don't make all the police reports about harassment public.
Sure but in those situations most like the CoC's like we are talking about (things like the contributor covenant) would not be need to remove the person that was abusive
I have been a part of many projects with out these types of CoC's where people have been removed from the project because they were an asshole, or the project is forked and the assholes are left behind
Historically that was the way of open source.
Today however it is much different... Politics and Social Status seem to matter more than Code, merit, and reality
Re:Open Letter to the Linux Foundation
by goatinaboat on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:00PM
(#21485502)
Yes.
[citation needed]
Part of a typical process is that these things are handled privately. Only the rare exceptions go public. That means those that know or can reference cases cannot share this detail. I would provide a citation if I could but I respect the privacy of the process so I can't.
The problem with this is it's the same argument that gets used to justify things like the Patriot Act. "The only times you see us use this power is in horrible ways, but we assure you, most of the time we use it for good reasons! We just can't tell you about it, because CLASSIFIED". In short, it's an argument that only works if you already trust the person making the argument.
IMO that shouldn't fly with the Patriot Act, and it shouldn't fly here either.
Re:Open Letter to the Linux Foundation
by djsumdog on Saturday November 09, 2019 @01:11AM
(#21489939)
I remember watching randyben get banned from Kiwicon one year. It was very public. They said his talk violated the CoC without specifically mentioned which part and how. It was very public, announced in front of the whole conference.
Re:Open Letter to the Linux Foundation
by lliamander on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:46PM
(#21485983)
Shouldn't the ones handled publicly be handled with greater care given the scrutiny?
Yes. Though, most CoC violations are handled privately for those involved so we don't hear much about them.