> Why CoC? Regardless of whether your organization is legally mandated to have a code of conduct (as public companies are), every organization should have one. A code has value as both an internal guideline and an external statement of corporate values and commitments.
A well-written code of conduct clarifies an organization’s mission, values and principles, linking them with standards of professional conduct. The code articulates the values the organization wishes to foster in leaders and employees and, in doing so, defines desired behavior. As a result, written codes of conduct or ethics can become benchmarks against which individual and organizational performance can be measured.
Additionally, a code is a central guide and reference for employees to support day-to-day decision making. A code encourages discussions of ethics and compliance, empowering employees to handle ethical dilemmas they encounter in everyday work. It can also serve as a valuable reference, helping employees locate relevant documents, services and other resources related to ethics within the organization.
> I worry that the CoC, along with "SJW's", are trying to ruin communities. user, worry not. CoC simply states what usually is unwritten rule. This provides accountability when said rules are violated. One should never fear being discriminated against in a work environment. This provides the MOST optimal work environment for all of those included.
I suppose it's entirely possible to create a CoC that wrecks with the SJW tactics, by doing funny things such as defining racism by the academic definition and forbidding witchhunts.
Levi Evans
personally I think the COCK is a good thing
Jason Johnson
I use Windows so I dont give a shit about you Linux cucks
Oliver Walker
Agreed. I think it is the right idea maybe with the wrong implementation at the moment. The fundamental idea of definining an environment that is conducive to your goal is sound. I think if more people get ahead on this thing and implement one before the es Jay dubyas do, then it is less of a meme that causes FUD, and more of another pillar in a productive environment
Ian Diaz
>user, worry not. CoC simply states what usually is unwritten rule. This provides accountability when said rules are violated. One should never fear being discriminated against in a work environment. This provides the MOST optimal work environment for all of those included.
My second point to you would be that is a fantastic ad hominem attack you provided, but alas, these do not change the substance of an idea or thought. Code of Conducts make sense at a core level, I think that's agreeable. However, if you do not like current CoC implementations, you should get ahead and start writing and providing some of your own for communities to use.
Yes, you can make a good code of conduct. But the one that chills the spine of people on Jow Forums is not one.
Jeremiah Jones
Best CoC in my opinion: >Project Trident expects everyone to conduct themselves professionally and respectfully. If you need assistance relating to conduct of another member of the community, please contact us at .
Lincoln Garcia
The best CoC would actually operate on the same principles as Jow Forums, fill it with so much racism and degenerate content that it creates a protective normie barrier such that only those who are there to talk shop stay around. One of the core tenets of open source is not discriminating against the users of the code, I see no reason why this should not apply to the contributors as well.
So there exists good CoC. So let's take Linux as an example. Some would argue everything was just fine, but I think some would also argue that it was a hostile environment. Those who felt the latter took it upon themselves and got something never thought possible accomplished. Of course, one could argue this is over correction. Over correction is normal and many times temporary. The fact is the conversation has started and more reasonable voices can now enter the discussion and moderate what many see as the extreme side of CoC's. I do not see how this is a bad thing rather than a natural process to a goal that benefits all parties involved.
It's not about "overcorrection", it's about a literal cult with a terrible vision trying to take over a project because they have religious motivations against how it operates internally, and using an purposefully vague CoC as a weapon to perform the deed.
Wyatt Lee
this desu
Juan Martinez
>Freedom of speech is a tool of oppression. They aren't even trying to hide anymore
Christian Moore
Do you have any examples of larger/successful projects or companies that were directly put out of business, or near failure, due to what you feel is a cult-like CoC implementation? I want to see the data representing the negative impacts.
Lincoln Martin
Do you have a source of larger, successful companies that are doing measurably worse directly related to a "cult-like" CoC implementation?
Same poster. Didn't show post before even after multiple refreshes.
Adam Walker
It's always nice to reminder people that CoCs are just both tools to push the transgender and "diversity" agenda, while at the same time guaranteeing the anonymity of anyone outside the project who wants to dispose of someone with the wrong opinions. Arguers in favor of this crap always use the same trick, they argue that CoCs promote inclusion, non-racism, and nicety between participants, so if you disagree then they turn the debate into "why are you racist?" or "developers fight for their right of being assholes" while dismissing every other argument, and even real examples of problems caused by them. The truth is that these things always get selectively applied, and just yesterday there were some people complaining about how in CppCon there were a person who was wearing sexualized clothing and spewing anti-white shit in Twitter, but nothing happened to him (CppCon even deleted the tweet where he appeared to prevent CoC violation accusations), while at the same time piling on someone just because of a silly but accurate joke (twitter.com/jyasskin/status/1044949868064595969). There are more examples in the usual communities, like in Rust, Rails, and in projects related to the big SV companies.
The best "code of conduct" is simply having separate places for serious project development discussion and off-topic discussion. For physical events, something like "${organization} reserves the right of admission, and to kick someone off the conference for any reason whatsoever, with or without refund" is more accurate to what happens in reality, and it's something that has worked well for quite a long time already.
The point of the contributor covenant is to fuck people over for the shit they do OUTSIDE the professional environment.
Carter Myers
Well, the cult foray into the corporations etc are quite a recent phenomena, so you can't see the final result yet, but you can see in most game corporations that caved in to those people a decline in the quality of the games. Also intel is showing some signs here and there.
Elijah Lopez
Understandably as well. We've seen time and time again with social media some employee at a company saying or doing some dumb racist shit. It is in the company's/organization's best interest to disassociate themselves from such person. To protect their image they can provide a CoC that lets them easily reference it when people question their company/organization when such event occurs to show this is not what the company believes or endorses whatsoever. Of course they could lose *some* customers but they would also retain & retain *new* customers while legally defending themselves as well. This seems like an obvious path to take
Elijah Garcia
the main point of CoCs is to inject progressive ideology where it doesnt belong, the complete intolerance for people who disagree is just a natural part of progressivism.
Adrian Mitchell
CoCs aren't worth the paper they're written on. They're so vague that the people in charge of enforcement can justify any action they want. >if they like you: "this thing user did isn't really a CoC violation, because of X Y and Z, so we're not going to do anything" >if they don't: "this thing user did is obviously a CoC violation under clauses X Y and Z, user is now banned from the project"
Go read up on Ashley Williams if you don't believe me. She used to be a Node board member, now she's Rust's community team lead. The Node leadership didn't like her, so when she posted "kill all men" and similar things on twitter, she got banned from Node for inciting violence. The Rust leadership does like her, so they have no interest in taking action over some "hyperbolic comments she made years ago, in an informal venue, in frustration". (And, as an added bonus, they deleted dozens of comments questioning her appointment as community lead.)
No, you missed the point. CoC's are at best a handwave and at worst, ignored completely.
Jordan Garcia
>you missed the point As the author of , I'd actually say he pretty much nailed it
Wyatt Hill
>existing community was tepid, cooperative and effective >in comes captain tranny and stirs up shit with his 1984 tier coc >community becomes divided, stressful, agrivated
If there is a source of "toxicity", it's the tranny. Toxicity never even seems to exist in communities until SJWs show up in them. The one person the community would be better off without is the person telling everyone how to act.
>they would also retain & retain *new* customers Ever heard the phrase, "get woke, go broke"?
David Barnes
this thing needs to hurry up and join the 40% already.
Jose Baker
No I disagree. Leadership doesn't need a "power tool" to kick out anyone they don't like, they will just do it. Codes of conduct are supposed to provide accountability. In the case of shitty leadership, they won't provide anything.
He should be removed simply because of conflict of interest. He clearly cares more about his own idealogical tribe of people (aka trannies) than everyone else, has an obvious victim complex and an obvious bias against a certain geographic that he considers an enemy tribe. It's simple psychology. This person should not be dictating how people act under the guise of wanting to make things better for everyone. He doesn't. He wants to force people to act in a way that benefits him and people like him specifically.
Robert Moore
why is /pol always trying to turn other boards to shit?
Gavin Adams
I would ask the same about SJWs in programming professions.
