Slashdot Mirror


One Of LLVM's Top Contributors Quits Development Over Code of Conduct, Outreach Program (phoronix.com)

Rafael Avila de Espindola is the fifth most active contributor to LLVM with more than 4,300 commits since 2006, but now he has decided to part ways with the project. From a report: Rafael posted a rather lengthy mailing list message to fellow LLVM developers today entitled I am leaving llvm. He says the reason for abandoning LLVM development after 12 years is due to changes in the community. In particular, the "social injustice" brought on the organization's new LLVM Code of Conduct and its decision to participate in this year's Outreachy program to encourage women and other minority groups to get involved with free software development. "I am definitely sad to lose Rafael from the LLVM project, but it is critical to the long term health of the project that we preserve an inclusive community. I applaud Rafael for standing by his personal principles, this must have been a hard decision," Chris Lattner, tweeted Thursday.

707 of 1,235 comments (clear)

  1. All we need are healing hugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    His loss is of great benefit, in the long run. Anyone who would get mad like this is unfit for software development in the modern world. LLVM needs more hugs and less time and focus spent on boring old dry compiler code.

    1. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hell no, hugs are sexual harassment.

    2. Re:All we need are healing hugs by psm321 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Careful, hugs may violate a code of conduct!

    3. Re:All we need are healing hugs by GWBasic · · Score: 5, Informative

      He's leaving because the intern program openly discriminates based on gender, sexual orientation, or ancestry. Basically, they won't hire a white American male as an intern. (See https://www.outreachy.org/appl...)

    4. Re:All we need are healing hugs by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 4, Informative

      He's leaving because the intern program openly discriminates based on gender, sexual orientation, or ancestry. Basically, they won't hire a white American male as an intern.

      You're pointing to a specific outreach program, not to LLVM's entire intern program.

    5. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Obviously, attempting to hire one intern who wasn't the same gender, orientation, or color as everyone else was an exhibition of great prejudice!

    6. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      It was an attempt to fight bigotry with worse bigotry. Wrong in principle. IMO, his reaction was quite tame considering.

    7. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, he was pointing to the generic Outreachy program rules. The rules that ALL partner orgs, such as LLVM, must adhere to. Did you not even bother to read before commenting?

      The LLVM COC tolerates both racism and sexism as long as they are committed against a white male.
      From the LLVM COC:

      Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding:
      ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’
      Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”
      Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts
      Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial
      Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions

    8. Re:All we need are healing hugs by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not an attempt to fight bigotry with worse bigotry, it's an attempt to fight intentional or unintentional discrimination with a small amount of discrimination in the other direction.

      I don't know where you're getting "bigotry" from, and I can't imagine why you think a small effort to encourage underrepresented groups into a project is somehow worse than overwhelming systemic efforts to channel only a privileged minority into it.

      I am not making a judgment here about whether it's a good idea, but it's absolutely not worse than the system it's trying to undo, and it has nothing to do with bigotry.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Aaden42 · · Score: 1

      They might indeed. Keep your damn hands to yourself unless you ask for and receive enthusiastic consent.

    10. Re: All we need are healing hugs by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      Hey, did you hear it guys? It's only spread to one part of the program.
      Was it necessary in the first place?
      Who hires people based on race colour and ancestry?

    11. Re:All we need are healing hugs by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      You're pointing to a specific outreach program, not to LLVM's entire intern program.

      The link points to an ad that is blatantly ILLEGAL under American law.

      Prohibited Practices: It is illegal for an employer to publish a job advertisement that shows a preference for or discourages someone from applying for a job because of his or her race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.

    12. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A) He stated their association with that outreach program is why he was quiting, so it is a valid observation.
      B) If they knowingly and willingly joined forces with this anti-social group, then it is the same as their embracing these ideas, which are not good.

      "We know the clan are racist, but we do business with them because we really need their money, so just stay out of sight when they are here."

    13. Re:All we need are healing hugs by war4peace · · Score: 1

      it's an attempt to fight intentional or unintentional discrimination with a small amount of discrimination in the other direction.

      This makes absolutely no fucking sense.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    14. Re:All we need are healing hugs by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

      "Small amount of discrimination"? During my son's last two years of high school I counted at least FOUR special technology programs, promoted by the school, that ONLY accepted female students. And in my current workplace I see yet another special activity or program exclusively for women and/or minorities several times a month.

      You don't fight sexism with more sexism. You don't fight racism with more racism.

    15. Re:All we need are healing hugs by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      How long have you been a native English speaker that you haven't learned the definition for the word bigotry, or prejudice?

      Not being inclusive toward you isn't automatically discrimination. Discrimination requires unjust or prejudicial action.
      Not including you is not automatically prejudicial. Prejudice requires a preconceived notion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
      Bigotry requires an intolerance to a person simply for the opinion they hold. Intolerance toward them for their *actions* is not bigotry.

      IMO, his reaction was based on the same thing your comment is- ignorance, and or a deep-seated actual prejudice against people who aren't like you.

    16. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      The link points to an ad that is blatantly ILLEGAL under American law.

      But in spite of this they somehow succeed in getting tax exempt status (501(c)(3) non-profit). This should be challenged.

    17. Re:All we need are healing hugs by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So it's okay to only discriminate once? Is there a yearly quota you get? Are you allowed to do it once monthly? Or is it a percentage of your total interns you're allowed to discriminate against?

      The problem with underrepresented groups in tech are that they are also under represented in all aspects leading up to the labour force. They are under represented in the job market and in universities too. You're not going to fix this problem with handouts based on skin colour.

    18. Re:All we need are healing hugs by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      All for it, if those programs are: Cooking, cleaning, baby raising and blowjobs.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    19. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Kulahan · · Score: 1

      "I identify as a female" There, now every single white male intern is now eligible. Make stupid rules, get stupid results.

    20. Re:All we need are healing hugs by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you're getting "bigotry" from, and I can't imagine why you think a small effort to encourage underrepresented groups into a project is somehow worse than overwhelming systemic efforts to channel only a privileged minority into it.

      Bigotry is probably the wrong word in both cases, but it absolutely is discriminatory. I doubt anyone really has a problem with someone trying to "encourage underrepresented groups", but the explicit requirements of the Outreachy project exclude large swaths of "gender-normal" (or whatever the PC term is) people.

      Discrimination is still discrimination, whether it's against a minority or a majority.

      overwhelming systemic efforts to channel only a privileged minority into it.

      To make such an outlandish claim requires strong evidence.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    21. Re:All we need are healing hugs by nullgreen · · Score: 1

      Not "the modern world", just the US. Affirmative action is illegal in most civilized countries.

    22. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Informative

      Note that the US Government's directions on how to operate an affirmative action program are here. People who tell you it's prohibited are distorting a little snippet of the law to deceive you.

    23. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      They are more likely to lose their 501(c)3 status if the do not run an affirmative action program. See the relevant language in the Civil Rights act here.

    24. Re: All we need are healing hugs by kurkosdr · · Score: 1

      As a compiler user, I don't care about hugs and only care about the compiler code.

    25. Re:All we need are healing hugs by temcat · · Score: 1

      LLVM needs more hugs

      Is it only me who read it as "needs more bugs"?

    26. Re:All we need are healing hugs by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      wow, amazing!


      You must meet one of the following criteria:

              You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).
              You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander

      FUCK THEM!

      exclude white males? for what reason?

      again, fuck that project and anyone who uses 'outreachy'.

      sick and tired of this reverse discrimination.

      exclusing ANYONE based on race (etc) is just plain stupid.
      and, no, you can't 'fix past problems' done to one group by punishing that other group. I had nothing to do with what our great grandfathers were doing; and mine was not even IN this country, back then. why discriminate again people like me?

      fucked up, is what this is.

      I wholly stand behind the dev who quit. he quit for a really good reason! lets hope that whole project fails. I could not care less how important it is (I avoid llvm anyway..). code of conduct that DISCRIMINATES is worse than not having one at all.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    27. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Not according to opinions written in certain recent Supreme Court cases.

      Affirmative Action is likely on its way out the window.

      From the 30th floor.

    28. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      After looking at the Outreachy program, I came away unconvinced that it was hiring at all. There is a $500 travel stipend and a $5000 living stipend, for 3 months. Even if they were to provide housing and food, living in any tech enclave for 3 months with $5000? I shiver at the prospect.

      It's all so inocuous. Getting one's underpants in a bind over it seems way over the top.

    29. Re:All we need are healing hugs by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      Keep making normal human interactions into pathology and see where it gets you.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    30. Re:All we need are healing hugs by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      You're copy-pasting stuff that isn't in the LLVM CoC: https://llvm.org/docs/CodeOfCo...

      Please provide a source for your copy-paste.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    31. Re:All we need are healing hugs by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Liar.

      https://llvm.org/docs/CodeOfCo...

      It does not contain the text you quoted.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re: All we need are healing hugs by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      My hate is the morally virtuous kind of hate!!!!1!!!11!!!!

    33. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      There is a great difference between doing affirmative action by removing barriers that make it hard for some people to compete for some jobs (or whatever) and doing it by erecting barriers to prevent others from applying for the jobs at all. Erecting barriers is actively discriminating; however, with today's warped world view, it is somehow seen acceptable to discriminate against white, straight males; some assumption that all white, straight males are unfairly successful and oppress others in society. Some white, straight males might - most do not; we just want to compete on an equal footing with everyone else.

      Little is said about the areas where women out compete men.

      As for discrimination against gays, trans, etc I do not see it at all. Never. However I live in England, things might be different in the USA.

    34. Re:All we need are healing hugs by tigersha · · Score: 1

      I was about to say. If the SJW #metooers go on like this soon we will have to wear biohazard suits and reproduce in petri dishes. Anonymously.

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    35. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      It's scary as fuck when you realize alt-right, white separatist rhetoric sounds more reasonable than the "diversity" efforts of today's most "progressive" programs.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    36. Re:All we need are healing hugs by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "Communicating in a âtoneâ(TM) you donâ(TM)t find congenial"

      How about if I don't find any tone "congenial" unless it conveys abject submission?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    37. Re:All we need are healing hugs by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the start of a blockbuster comedy movie!

    38. Re:All we need are healing hugs by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      Oh, go hug yourself.

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    39. Re:All we need are healing hugs by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      In a desperation move, I may read what he wrote before expressing a strong opinion. Or reading the strong opinions of others.

      Oops! To late for that last bit.

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    40. Re: All we need are healing hugs by liefer · · Score: 1

      I agree. Not worse. Equally as bad

    41. Re:All we need are healing hugs by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      You are as wrong as wrong can be. Not only is it bigotry, it is exactly the same sort of bigotry it purports to be "undoing".

    42. Re: All we need are healing hugs by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      Spare us your ridiculous sanctimony. Or should I say "citation needed"?

    43. Re:All we need are healing hugs by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 2

      Your definitional argument is bullshit. Not being inclusive toward me because of my gender or skin color IS discrimination.

    44. Re:All we need are healing hugs by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

      I can't find the "we will not act on complaint regarding..." text on the LLVM website. Has it been removed?

    45. Re: All we need are healing hugs by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

      Oh, right. I forgot that white men, and only white men, are the source of all evils in our society.

  2. Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Much better to get this from the horses mouth, instead of Phoronix - http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/122922.html

    1. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Informative

      Link and excerpt:

      The reason for me leaving are the changes in the community. The current license change discussions unfortunately bring to memory the fsf politics when I was working on gcc. That would still not be sufficient reason to leave. As with the code, llvm will still have the best license and if the only community change was the handling of the license change I would probably keep going.

      The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just writing a good compiler framework.

      Somewhat recently a code of conduct was adopted. It says that the community tries to welcome people of all "political belief". Except those whose political belief mean that they don't agree with the code of conduct. Since agreement is required to take part in the conferences, I am no longer able to attend.

      The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this.

      So long, and thanks for all the bugs,
      Rafael

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    2. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by Tailhook · · Score: 2

      Much better to get this from the horses mouth

      Indeed. The first thing you'll spot when you go to the primary source is that he doesn't want to be required to sign the "code of conduct" to attend LLVM conferences. Nice how that is left out of the Phoronix story and this summary. Beyond that he points out exclusionary paid internships he doesn't care to support.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    3. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Funny

      If he is anti-social-justice he must be shunned anyway, this simply saves llvm from having to kick him out.

      The problem I see is he could possibly join another project or be hired by some corporation and that must be prevented. Anyone who rejects the social justice movement is unfit to fill any role in a civilized society except that of prison inmate or involuntary organ donor. There is no room for patriarchal white supremacist cis-gendered Neanderthals in a civilized society.

      Found the UC-Berkeley "Diversity" administrator!

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The usual smear-campaign the SJWs so love is already in full swing.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The reason for me leaving are the changes in the community. The current license change discussions unfortunately bring to memory the fsf politics when I was working on gcc.

      Sounds like this guy is a serial squeaky wheel. The FSF is and has always been a political organisation, with a well enumreated set of goals.

      Sounds like he wants to work on large projects but can't stand the fact that other humans are involved.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:Thread Root on LLVM's mailing list by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      So his politics are basically that he wants to be able to discriminate people, based on race/religion/sexual orientation? And the CoC won't allow him to do so?

      Oh boo hoo such a precious snowflake. Good riddance. At least he removed himself, before they had to kick him out for being a piece of shit.

      --
      Eat the rich.
  3. Outreach by DaMattster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think outreach is a good thing. I don't see how actively encouraging diversity is a bad thing. I do believe that prolonged preferential treatment given to one population over another is not good. There are good reasons for short term preferential treatment in order to build a diversity, but after a while, preferential treatment versus evaluating someone based on their merits, causes problems.

    1. Re:Outreach by Vapula · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well what outreach does is nothing but discrimination... and is somehow as bad as other discriminating behaviour...

      and Outreach can backfire... The one hired thanks to Outreach may be felt as inferior who needed to put their "diversity" in front to get a job because he is lacking true skills...

      Outreach is a bad idea...

    2. Re:Outreach by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I think outreach is a good thing. I don't see how actively encouraging diversity is a bad thing.

      I don't see how encouraging can be conflated with enforcing.

      At the end of the day, it's the good ideas and execution of them as in writing top code that matters for LLVM. That can be done while encouraging diversity, but it needs to be encouraging, as in being a boon for everyone, not by making it easier for some by making it harder for others.

    3. Re:Outreach by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      I think outreach is a good thing.

      It depends on how you define it. Making a thing more accessible and welcoming to new people is a good thing.

      Bending over backward to accommodate people who are too sensitive and constantly causing drama is a bad thing.

    4. Re:Outreach by bobbied · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well what outreach does is nothing but discrimination...

      snip

      Outreach is a bad idea...

      Um, where I get what you are saying, I don't agree that outreach is discrimination nor is it necessarily a bad idea.

      Looking for qualified candidates within under represented demographics is not discrimination per se. If this effort to create diversity does not affect your standards, what is the issue? I think diversity is a good thing in a team working on something...

      That's not to say that all outreach programs are executed correctly and don't end up being discrimination and thus bad ideas. If your program causes you to lower your standards, accept less qualified contributors, then it's all the things you say. However, this is not necessarily a given. I've seen diversity programs that DON'T change standards or give preferential treatment to under represented demographics but did target demographics to solicit qualified candidates and educated hiring managers to be sensitive to personal bias and the use of objective criteria for selecting candidates. These programs where good things, not bad.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    5. Re:Outreach by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I don't see how actively encouraging diversity is a bad thing.

      Less-diverse teams are often more effective at working together most efficiently toward a common goal.
      Encouraging diversity in the world may be a good thing, but developer teams should not be striving to increase
      diversity in their team, unless the objective is to reduce the effectiveness of the team by making it "more average".

      I do believe that prolonged preferential treatment given to one population over another is not good.

      Lack of diversity existing does not imply or necessarily arise from preferential treatment given to one population over another.

    6. Re:Outreach by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      Outreach is a good thing, but outreachy is a discriminatory group. If the LLVM organization was truly about fair treatment for everyone, they wouldn't be actively aligning with discriminatory groups.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    7. Re:Outreach by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      "Outreach", which I only just read about from this post, appears to be well-intentioned. But it takes things too far. It is fine to monitor yourself and your organization for bias. It is fine to engage in recruitment efforts meant to fix problems with bias.

      With that said, the second you start discriminating based on race or gender in employment, you have crossed a line. You can have the best intentions, but you are now participating in exactly the same activity that you are trying to destroy.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    8. Re:Outreach by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Like I said.. IF your diversity program includes things like quotas and accepting lower qualifications from different demographics, I'm going to be the first to agree that it's a very bad thing.

      However, if your diversity program is about attracting fully qualified talent from a demographics which are under represented in your talent pool and preventing hiring decisions from having improper bias either way, I don't see how that's a bad thing..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    9. Re:Outreach by gweihir · · Score: 1

      So you advocate to have people of all skill levels and talent levels and level of interest and dedication in a demanding, hardcore tech project? Because that is what "diversity" means.

      See where you are wrong?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re:Outreach by sabri · · Score: 1

      I don't agree that outreach is discrimination

      Explicitly excluding on the basis of country of origin, biological gender, psychological gender, sexual preference or skin color is nothing but discrimination. The fact that excluding white males is socially acceptable does not make it any different.

      It is perfectly fine to have an organization that promotes equal opportunity. But it should be exactly that: equal opportunity for everyone.

      I also find it very interesting that it's always about the "inclusion" and "diversity" when it comes to the nice tech or executive jobs. I've never seen a self-proclaimed equalist protesting in favor of male rights in child custody cases, or protesting for more males in elementary level teaching positions.
      br> So stop your SJW bullshit and have another un-biased look at what you just said.

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    11. Re:Outreach by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Did you even read what I wrote?

      I was disagreeing with the original posts "ALL diversity programs are bad ideas" because they are not.

      As I pointed out (and you repeated) IF you are sacrificing qualifications for one demographic over another, it's not good.

      I don't see how we are in disagreement... You DON'T get to discriminate or relax qualifications based on demographics, everybody has the same chance and same standard. AND if your program is discussing diversity from the perspective of not discriminating, I don't have any issues with your program. Now if you have quotas or varying standards based on demographics, I DO have a problem with your program. If you want to target help wanted advertisements or market your company to specific demographics because they are under represented in your workforce, why would I care? Just make sure there isn't more than one standard.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    12. Re:Outreach by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      I don't see a huge problem with it either, but the few women I know in Open Sources hates it, as they appreciate being treated as equals, and don't how some parts are now trying to treat them special.

    13. Re:Outreach by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Well what outreach does is nothing but discrimination

      No. You don't know what that word means. Please stop using it until you do.

      You should have said, "Well, what outreach does is provide an organization to assist people who aren't like me"
      That is *not* discrimination.
      The KKK is not discriminatory because it only accepts white people. The KKK is discriminatory because it only helps white people because it believes them to be superior.

      Repeat after me: Discrimination requires unjust or prejudicial action.

      If your next stop is to argue that it is prejudicial... Do me a favor and education yourself on the definition of that word as well. You'll find your argument exists only in the gaps of your knowledge, and by the time they are filled, your argument will be gone. Or the cognitive dissonance will throw you into a tizzy and you'll just start spouting complete nonsense.

    14. Re:Outreach by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      I don't see how encouraging can be conflated with enforcing.

      Oh we all agree there. If Outreachy required LLVM to only accept non straight white guys, you'd have a real argument.

      As it is... they don't, and you don't.

      Within their own *outreach* organization that promotes their historically discriminated class? Who cares?

    15. Re:Outreach by Vapula · · Score: 1

      When a job opportunity is only open to a specific gender/ethnic-origin/sexual orientation/... IT IS discrimination... Because all the people that are not part of these groups are prevented to apply just because they don't have the correct gender/ethic-origin/sexual orientation/...

      Excluding white men or excluding black women is basically the same thing... In both cases, the excluded people are victim of a prejudicial action...

      Outreach is not about ASSISTING people... It's about giving job exclusivity to specific groups...

      A true ASSISTING procedure would be to have a company who would act as a proxy between all candidates and the employer, masking the gender/ethnic-origin/sexual orientation/... of job candidates... of ALL jobs candidates (of both gender, all ethnic-origin, ...) so the job would be given to the most suited regardless of his gender/ethnic origin/...

    16. Re:Outreach by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      When a job opportunity is only open to a specific gender/ethnic-origin/sexual orientation/... IT IS discrimination...

      Let me stop you right there.
      Learn the definition of the word, then get back to me.
      Discrimination, as in telling the difference between two things, is perfectly legal. Discrimination is after all a natural part of the hiring process- discriminating between applicants that fit the company's needs better.
      Discrimination, as in the prejudicial or unjust treatment of a person because of some aspect of them, is a problem.
      You're conflating the two things to make your point, and that is disingenuous.
      It's ok for hooters to only hire women waitresses. It's ok for chip n' dales to only hire male dancers.
      What is not ok is for hooters to only hire mexicans to cook "because white people suck at it".

      Get it?

      The relevant law you're looking for is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

      Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, (1) it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to hire and employ employees, for an employment agency to classify, or refer for employment any individual, for a labor organization to classify its membership or to classify or refer for employment any individual, or for an employer, labor organization, or joint labor management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining programs to admit or employ any individual in any such program, on the basis of his religion, sex, or national origin in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise

      Enjoy.

    17. Re:Outreach by Vapula · · Score: 1

      "in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise"

      Tell me how religion, sex, national origin, ... are a qualification necessary to produce good quality code...

      You can't because these DON'T MATTER TO CODE... so it is unlawful discrimination.

    18. Re:Outreach by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Huh? Are you being deliberately stupid?
      It's a minority outreach organization... They're not accomplishing their mission goal by hiring white guys to do it...
      Tell me how having tits, an ass, and not much covering either is necessary to wait tables?

  4. LLVM code of conduct by Brannon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So he's leaving because the "LLVM code of conduct" says incendiary things like "Be friendly and patient." and "Be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others".

    Oh, and they're participating in an outreach program to encourage under-represented demographics to participate in open source project.

    I guess that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

    1. Re:LLVM code of conduct by sqorbit · · Score: 1

      I think the point he was trying to make was when he started no one cared what his beliefs where, his race or his political beliefs. Why should they care now? I don't believe after reading his post that he really made his point well. I can understand someone feeling like "why do we need a code of conduct that says be nice to people?". Unfortunately we are in a political climate now we have to specially state the obvious and make sure we aren't offending any number of people. Now we are offending people simply by stating we are trying not to offend someone.

      --
      Sent from my TARDIS
    2. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have recently seen a high-profile community project where a key engineer believed (among other things) women should be shielded and kept at home. This engineer, obviously, had conflicts with people in the organization. Actually maybe about 30 people. Eventually, the membership walked off en mass and founded their own project. The new project has essentially the same code of conduct we're discussing here.

      You need rules on paper for when stuff like this happens. It helps make slippery stuff like who offended who and whether such offense is out of scope for the project a lot easier to decide.

    3. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wrong. He's leaving because of crap like this.

      From the LLVM COC:

      Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding:

              ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’
              Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”
              Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts
              Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial
              Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions

      Quit being a tool.

    4. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe YOU need rules on paper, but some of us are all grown up and don't need a piece of paper to tell us how we should behave.

    5. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Altus · · Score: 2

      Nobody cares now either. If he honestly believes that women should be kept barefoot and pregnant that doesn't impact his ability to be part of the project as long as he can keep those opinions to himself and not let them impact the way he interacts with other people on the team, at least in so far as such interaction might violate a code of conduct that is basically just "Be excellent to each other."

      If you can't be kind and reasonable with the members of a coding team then you have no place in modern software development. Modern software is not developed by one person sitting in a dark room anymore, it requires communication skills and healthy team dynamics to function.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    6. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's kind of funny how in one sentence you protested that you don't need a piece of paper to tell you how to believe, and expressed a bad attitude about having rules. All in the same sentence.

      I did tell a community I'm managing, in an email, that I never expect the rule to be exercised. They are all professionals. But the rule is working even when it is not exercised. Having rules is explicitly to do two things: 1. Exclude people who don't like them. and 2. Give a rules-based means for penalizing or ejecting people who violate them. #1 keeps #2 from happening.

    7. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Yes, compound sentences are amazing things. I am glad you have made up some rules to exclude people who don't like your rules. The irony is delicious.

    8. Re:LLVM code of conduct by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      So he's leaving because the "LLVM code of conduct" says incendiary things like "Be friendly and patient." and "Be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others".

      No. He says explicitly what made him leave. Unsurprisingly that information was intentionally excluded from TFA.

      You have to read what he posted to the mailing list to find out.

    9. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      There were a few problems with the community the nerds had built. Not just computer programming - I deal with this exact same problem regarding Amateur Radio, which has taken the same community and carried it another 50 years, so I figure it's predictive of what could happen in computer programming. Go to a hamfest or electronics flea market, and look around. All we have are old white guys.

    10. Re:LLVM code of conduct by XXongo · · Score: 1

      Wrong. He's leaving because of crap like this.

      From the LLVM COC:

      You mean, this LLVM Code of Conduct? https://llvm.org/docs/CodeOfConduct.html?

    11. Re:LLVM code of conduct by barc0001 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > "why do we need a code of conduct that says be nice to people?"

      The simple reply to this is "have you spent 20 minutes on the Internet in the last few years? There's your answer"

    12. Re:LLVM code of conduct by datavirtue · · Score: 1
      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    13. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Probably true. I am just feeling argumentative today. I need to take my meds.

    14. Re:LLVM code of conduct by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Tech should be a meritocracy and these attempts to make up for lack of ability with sob stories are destroying it.

      [Burns voice]

      "Excellent!"

      [/Burns voice]

      -Proprietary Software Industry
      ---

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    15. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, and they're participating in an outreach program to encourage under-represented demographics to participate in open source project.

      It upsets some people because you're assuming that the under-representation is due to some flaw which needs to be corrected. i.e. You're assuming correlation implies causation. Applying the scientific method, the under-representation merely suggests that discrimination may be to blame, but is not proof in itself. One would need to first prove that the under-representation is caused by discrimination, before corrective action is justified. But instead, the under-representation itself is incorrectly being used as "evidence" that corrective action is necessary.

      Also your corrective action is blatant favoritism which would be decried as evil and discriminatory if it went the other way. i.e. You're trying to fight one type of discrimination by encouraging a different type of discrimination. This accomplishes the primary goal, e.g. getting people to realize it's wrong to discriminate against women. But it has the unfortunate side-effect of making some people conclude it's OK to discriminate against men. So you're not exactly reducing discrimination, you just replacing one type with another. And your corrective action will result in a long-term oscillation between different forms of discrimination, with no real reduction in the absolute total amount of discrimination. If you want to teach people that discrimination is wrong, you can't do it with programs which encourage different types of discrimination.

    16. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You should make those old white guys sign a piece of paper and that will fix THAT problem.

    17. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Sorry to hear that.

    18. Re:LLVM code of conduct by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, and they're participating in an outreach program to encourage under-represented demographics to participate in open source project.

      No, the LLVM organization is choosing to align itself with a discriminatory group, while LLVM pretends to be non-discriminatory by creating a code of conduct to be used as a tool to persecute members who disagree with discriminatory behavior.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    19. Re:LLVM code of conduct by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 2

      ...but Linus doesn't participate in the LLVM. Its going to get interesting when the corporate sponsors of linux decide they have to move on from the linux kernel in order to satisfy some gender biased notion of what's "fair" to some minority group.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    20. Re:LLVM code of conduct by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Until they try to get in your way, then Merit includes the ability to get fucking rid of the air thieves while being the minimum dick (that still sends them down the road).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    21. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Insincerity is a violation of my CoC.

    22. Re:LLVM code of conduct by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have recently seen a high-profile community project where a key engineer believed (among other things) women should be shielded and kept at home. This engineer, obviously, had conflicts with people in the organization. Actually maybe about 30 people. Eventually, the membership walked off en mass and founded their own project. The new project has essentially the same code of conduct we're discussing here.

      You need rules on paper for when stuff like this happens. It helps make slippery stuff like who offended who and whether such offense is out of scope for the project a lot easier to decide.

      Fuck that. What needs to happen is people need to grow the fuck up and learn to tolerate those with different beliefs and values from their own. Including ones that insult you and piss you off.

      What does beliefs about women have to do with engineering? Was the engineer designing home shields for women? Magnetic shoes to confine them to the house? Was the engineer doing something illegal?

      Grow the fuck up.

    23. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      If I meant to be insincere, I would have made some comment about your opinion being based on pathology. Needing meds and being argumentative as a symptom can't be fun.

    24. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      You must be lots of fun at parties. Do you get invited to any? :-)

    25. Re:LLVM code of conduct by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Merit includes the ability to get along with others without being a dick.

      No, it doesn't.

    26. Re:LLVM code of conduct by AsylumWraith · · Score: 1

      Go to a hamfest or electronics flea market, and look around. All we have are old white guys.

      My experience isn't the same as yours. I run a net in DFW, 14 sessions a week, every week. Almost half the net controls are women. I know women in positions of "authority," within the ARRL, (as much as said authority means anything in the real world,) our most recent ex-Section Manager here was a woman. If you go to Hamcom in Plano or Cowtown Hamfest in Fort Worth, you'll see plenty of women.

      I'm not going to argue about more men than women being amateurs, but to say it's all "old white guys," is silly. The bigger problem is that amateur radio is a dying art form in general; young people aren't generally interested in it.

    27. Re:LLVM code of conduct by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One would need to first prove that the under-representation is caused by discrimination, before corrective action is justified.

      Yes, exactly.

      Strangely enough, when people start treating you like you've done something horrible, and you haven't, people don't like that.

    28. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      We just need 100,000 more women like them.

      I am involved in a cubesat program, digital communications, and a digital voice codec. All Open Source. There is no reason for young people to be disinterested in these. Not wanting to ragchew with some guy about his gall bladder, that I can understand.

    29. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're reading research study after research study that demonstrates causation

      No, you are not. The research is very mixed, but it tends to favor the argument by James Damore, that the observed demographic differences may be caused by factors other than discrimination. See

      https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences

    30. Re:LLVM code of conduct by tbannist · · Score: 1

      It is a charity that focuses on getting communities under-represented in open source software involved in open source software.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    31. Re:LLVM code of conduct by gweihir · · Score: 1

      An outreach program based not on skill and talent, but on characteristics like gender, race or sexual orientation is a deep insult to anybody with carefully developed and maintained deep technological skills. Because what it does is to pull in people that do not qualify and it says to those that have worked hard to be good enough "all your dedication and hard work is worthless because you have the wrong gender/race/sexual orientation". That is just unacceptable. Trying to get a "balanced demographic" in a technologically demanding project is pure insanity. These things have to _work_ and that only can be achieved by meritocracy. And that is why the SJWs can only destroy, not create or improve.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    32. Re:LLVM code of conduct by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      What does beliefs about women have to do with engineering?

      Imagine those attitudes in a workplace. If the engineer believes that women should be shielded and kept at home, and has women on his team, will he shield those women more than he shields men from work challenges? will he give reviews or peer feedback that make them more likely to leave the workplace and stay at home, than he does men? will he cut short hallway chats with them because he doesn't believe they should be on his team?

      Was the engineer doing something illegal?

      If he was doing any of those things within a company in America, then yes it would have been illegal. We obviously don't know whether he was actually doing them. In a company, it would boil down to the question of whether management is willing to tolerate the legal risk. In a community project, it boils down to the question of whether the rest of the project was willing to tolerate the behavior. For that at least, we have the answer.

    33. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're looking at this wrong.

      Under-representation is a problem because there are people that currently feel excluded from OSS, and they feel excluded partly because of the bad behaviour of some people in the OSS community, and also because after years of not being encouraged to be around, some people have decided that it would be nice to throw some encouragement to those under-represented groups. This isn't a matter of displacing people that are already here, or even stopping encouragement of white, straight, cis men, it's merely extending the circle of encouragement.

      Indeed, YOU'RE the one drawing false causality here. Encouraging a woman to join an open source project DOES NOT implicitly discourage men from being there or encourage discrimination against men. Discrimination against women is a long-standing, structural issue in our society. Everyone does it, including women. Fighting against discrimination against women—i.e., feminism—is only encouraging discrimination against men if you're the most fragile of men, unable to distinguish between lifting someone up to achieve equality versus seeing the erosion of your own privilege as discrimination.

      I'm a tall, athletic, white male with a university degree and all my hair. There is literally no axis upon which I'm discriminated against. I have no problem doing outreach programs where we encourage more women to enroll in computing science, or attract women to work in the games industry. I've done both those things personally during my life, and I hope to do more of it in the future. I'm not putting any men out of work, I assure you. I've had 2 female programmer colleagues in 16 years in the games industry.

      Encouragement is not the same as discrimination, even if your encouragement is targeted. If you're afraid for your future (or the future of white men in general), that's on you. Try to figure out why you think me asking a woman to consider a career in this industry is such a threat.

    34. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Cederic · · Score: 1

      It is for the rest of us.

      Yeah, I know, I just broke 18 CoC. Me, I say that's the fucking problem with them.

    35. Re:LLVM code of conduct by thomst · · Score: 1

      Bruce Perens commented:

      I have recently seen a high-profile community project where a key engineer believed (among other things) women should be shielded and kept at home. This engineer, obviously, had conflicts with people in the organization. Actually maybe about 30 people. Eventually, the membership walked off en mass and founded their own project. The new project has essentially the same code of conduct we're discussing here.

      You need rules on paper for when stuff like this happens. It helps make slippery stuff like who offended who and whether such offense is out of scope for the project a lot easier to decide.

      Bruce, with all due respect, while I agree with your conclusion, that does not appear to me to be the basis of Mr. Espindola's objection to the recently-changed conditions at LLVM and his decision to leave the organization.

      The quality of the writing in TFS is, as is not atypical for Slashdot, largely to blame for confusing the issue. Some of the comments above have included quotes from Mr. Espindola himself that make it clear his objection is more to LLVM's association with Outreachy than to its recently-adopted code of conduct per se. An objective reading of Outreachy's membership qualification statement makes it pellucidly clear that it is specifically constituted to discriminate against heterosexual males to the point that even those who enthusiastically support diversity outreach methods are barred from membership in the group.

      The full text of his announcement includes this rather specific statement to that effect, which, naturally, appears nowhere in TFS or the parent article from which it's drawn:

      The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry. This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this.

      LLVM's new code of conduct would seem to pre-emptively block him from even posting about his objection to that affiliation without being banned from the organization. I believe that's indefensible on its face - and I hope you do, too ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    36. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Cederic · · Score: 2

      That's not the only issue with it.

      The draft Reporting Guide states that there's no appeals process against reprimands or temporary bans, and if you talk about the lies some cunt made up about you in public you're immediately contravening the CoC whether you had initially or not.

      It's basically a charter for a small group to maliciously take over the project. No governance, no accountability, no transparency.

    37. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Mandrel · · Score: 1

      Encouragement is not the same as discrimination, even if your encouragement is targeted.

      Encouragement is certainly much better than quotas, including the dedicated scholarships (a 100% quota) that was one of the factors that drove this guy's decision to leave.

      Better would be to encourage all who under-sell themselves. I see how targeting hotspots of groups with a legacy of discrimination can be efficient, but correcting discrimination with discrimination risks fueling resentment at the unfairness.

    38. Re:LLVM code of conduct by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      Rules on paper lead to eventual efficiency-killing bureaucracy. Be careful what you wish for.

    39. Re:LLVM code of conduct by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      I have always reject people trying to tell me how to think. I rejected the church people decades ago, and now the same is coming from the other side.

      Both suck. Not everyone has to think in lockstep.

      Free thinking not allowed?

    40. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Citation needed. That's the key to the whole debate and I've never seen anything convincing.

      My personal experience (which is also not a proof -- just my experience) is that women in tech are already largely being positively discriminated.

      Also there aren't many women/minorities in universities, studying computer programming, so it's only normal they are less represented later. Anything different would mean favoring them which means having a lower standard to hire them. That is, on the other hand, a very good way to polarize people and make them hate each other. The whole thing that happens here, in a word.

    41. Re: LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Funny, the guy who got drunk and ran into the back of my car while I had been stopped at a traffic light - he thought exactly that. It was definitely much more efficient to drive home right away from the bar, and sober up while he was asleep. The cops and the folks at his insurance company didn't seem to buy his "efficiency" argument.

    42. Re:LLVM code of conduct by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      but some of us are all grown up and don't need a piece of paper to tell us how we should behave.

      Not you though. You're a poster child for why codes of conduct are a good idea.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    43. Re:LLVM code of conduct by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Fuck that. What needs to happen is people need to grow the fuck up and learn to tolerate those with different beliefs and values from their own. Including ones that insult you and piss you off.

      Absolutely, we should make sure that people have nothing better to do than hang out with raging assholes. Then they'll have to work on an open source project in their free time.

      Seriously, think. Why the fuck would I want to waste my precious off hours tolerating utter gobshites?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    44. Re: LLVM code of conduct by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      About 20% of the population are Russians.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    45. Re:LLVM code of conduct by istartedi · · Score: 1

      It doesn't sound like they needed rules on paper to fix their problem. They added the code of conduct *after* they forked the project.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    46. Re:LLVM code of conduct by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      Hmm, a lot of people have private views that confront others. This engineer's views, for instance, are shared by almost the entire male population of Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. Would it not be better to engage with a Saudi Arabian engineer -- at least then, there is the prospect of him modulating or even changing his personal views in the long term? Rather, what often happens is the teasing out someone's private thoughts, with a view of excluding them from your community?

      If engagement is better, why are statements like the above not commonplace in rules of conduct?

      The only reason for exclusion I would make are members who refuse to execute group dealings on an equal basis. For instance, if the Saudi engineer refused to correspond with group members with female names.

      I would also avoid explicit mention of cis, trans, queer terminology in codes of conduct. Simply have a call for tolerance, kindness, engagement and executing group dealings on an equal basis.

    47. Re:LLVM code of conduct by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In that case, good. You're not going to run afoul of such a code of conduct. Unfortunately, there are people out there who are assholes, and the CoC is to set boundaries for them.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    48. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      I've had 2 female programmer colleagues in 16 years in the games industry.

      That's because women are smarter than men and know better than to go into such a shitty industry voluntarily.

    49. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      100% correct. Perhaps I need to be sent in for SJW indoctrination as well?

    50. Re:LLVM code of conduct by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Meritocracy, sure. However, if one group of the population is way overrepresented, it makes sense to inquire why. If the project was drawing from a larger talent pool, presumably it would have access to even more competent people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    51. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I have dealt with many Islamics in the work place and none of them ever seemed to have a problem with my obvious Jewish origin.

      If you are Islamic and think women are property or that Jews are anathema - and let's keep in mind that there are many different flavors of Islam and that most of the people we meet in the US do not think this, you'd better keep it to yourself.

      I declined to participate in a project in Quatar, simply because they have messy rules about Jews on their airlines.

    52. Re:LLVM code of conduct by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. They already have anybody interested. And nobody competent will just have accidentally overlooked them. Incidentally, the "why" has long since been answered, just that reality is not PC here and hence this answer gets ignored.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    53. Re:LLVM code of conduct by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Strangely enough, when people start treating you like you've done something horrible, and you haven't, people don't like that.

      Well this reveals a deeper truth. People fighting discrimination aren't telling you personally that you've done something wrong unless you have. Perhaps the problem is that it triggers introspection and you dislike what you see. So you lash out at the messenger.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    54. Re:LLVM code of conduct by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I need to be sent in for SJW indoctrination as well?

      Please don't. I find your irregular spamming of threads rather entertaining. I suspect it happens when you've got plenty of time while you're "resting" between jobs after you got fired for misconduct.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    55. Re:LLVM code of conduct by malkavian · · Score: 1

      I've read opinions, and case studies galore that say discrimination to blame. But they are scientifically weak to unacceptable to determine causality.
      I've read a few cross sectional studies that say discrimination isn't to blame. Quite a few of those have actively been starting with the proposal that discrimination is to blame, and they've intrusively gone looking for it to find none, yet drawn conclusions that discrimination is to blame, they just haven't found it yet (which incidentally is exactly what the Inquisition of old used to say about heretics; they're guilty of heresy, but they may not have quite been tortured enough to confess yet).
      Case control studies and above show no discrimination, and seem to be concluding that choice is the largest factor (not just the choice about whether to go for job (x), but the life choices leading up to being able to qualify for job (x)).
      It's looking like the stronger the scientific used to examine the situation, the less it looks like discrimination is to blame, so the system isn't broken.

    56. Re:LLVM code of conduct by malkavian · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see you go for the internship that was being advertised then (no white males allowed, unless they happen to be gay).
      I'm completely with encouragement. What I'm against ethically is discrimination any segment for any reason not related to their ability to perform a job, especially when one of the rules of the community is that discrimination is not allowed, when they are themselves actively discriminating.

    57. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I can't get a job! By the way, replying to posts is not spam. But you are very good at redefining things to suit your purposes.

    58. Re:LLVM code of conduct by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      If true: They make that decision when girls, not women.

      They also exclude (to about the same degree) themselves from the hard sciences, math etc.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    59. Re:LLVM code of conduct by lordlod · · Score: 1

      Maybe YOU need rules on paper, but some of us are all grown up and don't need a piece of paper to tell us how we should behave.

      Sadly common sense isn't universally common. The rules have to be written for the hidden non-grown ups among us. As a grown up, having a rule that tells you not to do something you were never going to do shouldn't bother you too much, not many people object to there being laws against murder.

      For example at a previous workplace a rule was introduced which I nicknamed "thou shalt wear pants". Sounds stupid, was stupid. It was introduced because a developer stopped wearing pants. After several conversations asking him to put on pants, over a few weeks, a formal dress code had to be introduced.

    60. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. What was he wearing? Shorts? What is wrong with wearing shorts? If he was wearing underwear, or going naked, why wouldn't you just fire him? You are right about it being a stupid rule. Really stupid. A grown up would have just fired him on the spot.

    61. Re:LLVM code of conduct by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Too bad everyone has a different opinion of who is an asshole and who isn't. I am sure everyone has violated that CoC at some point in their life as it also applies to behavior outside of LLVM. I wouldn't run afoul of that CoC because I wouldn't participate in such a restrictive "community".

    62. Re:LLVM code of conduct by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I can't get a job!

      I am genuinely surprised. I cannot imagine why anyone would not want to hire such a rational, upstanding gentleman such as yourself.

      By the way, replying to posts is not spam.

      so if I reply to a post advertising cheap Nike shoes, that's not spam merely by virtue of being a reply? Interesting! Have you considered getting a job at a mass emai marketing campaign company?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    63. Re:LLVM code of conduct by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      None of that stuff is in the LLVM CoC: https://llvm.org/docs/CodeOfCo...

      Why are you copy-pasting lies?

      --
      Eat the rich.
    64. Re:LLVM code of conduct by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Under-representation is a problem because there are people that currently feel excluded from OSS

      Why do they feel excluded? I see no barriers to entry other than having a computer and an Internet connection of some sort.

      I mean, some people get their panties in a twist over Linus playing hard ball. If someone with different genitals or culture can't handle that due to the dictates of their genitals or culture, then too fucking bad. Don't play in kernel development then. Find another project, don't try to fuck with shit that is not directly aimed at cultures and genitals by trying to make it about culture and genitals.

      Without knowing the specifics of what you are describing in relation to your hiring practices, I will have to agree that you are encouraging and not actively discriminating... however, your thought processes indicate to me that you are likely actively discriminating but just have not had much luck with it yet.

      Your nick is echoing around in my head as someone I have respected in the past... but now, I am filled with caution. You might be dangerous. Discrimination, reverse or not, is evil. As I said, your words seem fair, but the specifics of how you achieve that fairness ...

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    65. Re:LLVM code of conduct by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The discussion is about interns, which means they don't yet have everyone interested, and failing to apply is not accidentally overlooking.

      The "separate interests" or "different nature" arguments are probably millennia old. I'm not at all confident that they're correct now. I'm going to need to see some actual evidence that this is the best of all possible worlds before I buy it as the answer. So, yes, you have an answer that you like, so you want inquiries to be closed.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    66. Re:LLVM code of conduct by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If everyone has a different idea as to what an asshole is, that's a great reason to institute some sort of guide to conduct in the community. The Reporting section suggests using informal methods to resolve problems, and spends a lot of time considering face-to-face venues. In any case the code of conduct explicitly applies only to LLVM-controlled virtual and physical spaces. Violating the Code of Conduct doesn't result in any sort of ban unless it's egregious.

      I wonder why you consider the CoC that restrictive. If you had a job, and violated it, someone would likely talk to you about it sometime. Violating it would require doing things that could be disruptive to the community, and it's not worth having a disruptive person around, no matter how competent.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    67. Re:LLVM code of conduct by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Imagine those attitudes in a workplace. If the engineer believes that women should be shielded and kept at home, and has women on his team, will he shield those women more than he shields men from work challenges? will he give reviews or peer feedback that make them more likely to leave the workplace and stay at home, than he does men? will he cut short hallway chats with them because he doesn't believe they should be on his team?

      There was no evidence or indication provided by parent to indicate any of this was the case. Only beliefs' were mentioned not actions.

    68. Re:LLVM code of conduct by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Absolutely, we should make sure that people have nothing better to do than hang out with raging assholes. Then they'll have to work on an open source project in their free time.

      Seriously, think. Why the fuck would I want to waste my precious off hours tolerating utter gobshites?

      Absolutely, we should make sure that people have nothing better to do than hang out with Italians. Then they'll have to work on an open source project in their free time.

      Seriously, think. Why the fuck would I want to waste my precious off hours tolerating Italians?

      If society is not willing to tolerate "gobshites" or "Italians" then society gets what it deserves. Tolerance isn't about fun and games. It's not something that is supposed to be fun and enjoyable. It's something that is necessary for a free society.

    69. Re:LLVM code of conduct by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      I believe in genocide. I believe in female castration. I believe white people are superior to every one else. I believe trans people are just mentally damaged and should be lobotomized or simply killed.

      I've worked with someone who openly advocated the murder hundreds million by means of turning the entire middle east into a "glass parking lot". They were dead serious about it. This was not hyperbole or idle joking.

      Just because someone has apeshit beliefs about something so long as they are not infringing on rights of others by breaking laws it is still possible to work with and respect those you disagree with.

      I don't actually believe those things but the idea that "people need to grow the fuck up and learn to tolerate those with different beliefs and values from their own" is fucking short sighted and moronic.

      Tolerating doesn't mean agreeing or accepting. If someone is advocating for something you think is wrong nobody is suggesting you remain silent.

      What you mean is as long as they aren't too far from your own or don't affect you. As a global community we decided on what are acceptable values and beliefs. There's variation in those but eventually everyone has to reconcile on a standard or we will go to war over it. It's happened over and over and over.

      Both freedom and tyranny are self-reinforcing phenomena.

      Tyranny withers in face of freedom of expression.
      Freedom withers in the face of censorship.

      Censorship is universally invoked from a position of fear. Fear if you don't silence others by force your ideas and ideology will lose out to others. Weak minded fools who pollute society with this nonsense are incapable of understanding censorship always aggregates power and corrupts the state. We are already seeing "hate speech" laws throughout Europe leveraged for political suppression. The most free and righteous societies are driven by those who work to build consensus for what they believe - vigorously exercising the morsels of power they have at their disposal to improve society.

      If you study history and research correlations between freedoms of individuals vs. belligerence of states towards things like human rights you will see the true enemy is censorship and intolerance. It isn't speech.

      There's variation in those but eventually everyone has to reconcile on a standard or we will go to war over it. It's happened over and over and over. Slavery used to be acceptable. So did pedophilia.

      Slavery is still very much alive and well and very much acceptable to everyone involved with it.

      Modern day slavery is powered almost exclusively by illegitimate behavior of the state. Specifically most states in the world have declared whoring and drugs illegal expending great deal of resources to enforce laws too many (Roughly at least 20%) of its citizens are willing to break regardless of legality. Everyone who thinks drugs and whoring should be outlawed are actively supporting slavery by their advocacy.

      Times change. Values change. Beliefs should change too. If beliefs didn't matter we wouldn't have a few millennia worth of various holy wars.

      Holy wars? You mean that thing where people with "incorrect" beliefs were murdered? I'm sure that the "few millennia" had nothing to do with others telling people what they should believe or else thus reinforcing "the wrong beliefs (tm)".

    70. Re:LLVM code of conduct by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      I would, if white males were an underrepresented group.

      But they're not. They rarely are. I would fully support groups that paved the way for more male schoolteachers or nurses—female dominated work.

      Who's over-represented in code? White men. So who needs encouragement? EVERYONE ELSE.

  5. Good for you, Rafael. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When I started writing software no one was pushing me into it or giving me special encouragement because I had the right chromosome or skin color. Good for you, Rafael.

    1. Re:Good for you, Rafael. by Holi · · Score: 1

      That's because you have a y chromosome, had you been a double x I bet your position and experiences would be quite different.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re: Good for you, Rafael. by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I await the eventual pillaging of my property and Family's assets.

      Ah, congratulations on getting married.

  6. Poor guy got triggered by bahwi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously triggered, needs his safe space again where he pretends everyone is on even footing.

    Maybe he will learn how countless others have felt with the unstated rules of discrimination in so many projects, companies, etc.... People should be accepted into communities based on skill. That's not how things are. The disconnect between how things "should be" vs. how things "are." People can still be fired for being gay (or even perceived gay, although I think there is a lawsuit there because he was actually straight).

    Don't like politics creeping in? GOP has been pushing identity politics since before Bush W with the whole marriage ban and sodomy laws, there is gonna be a push-back and people aren't going to like it. When it affects individuals it's going to come back on the individual level, which means communities.

    1. Re:Poor guy got triggered by datavirtue · · Score: 3, Funny

      "People should be accepted into communities based on skill."

      Whoa now! That was never part of the social justice agenda. We cannot be discriminating based on skill if we are to have a just society.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    2. Re:Poor guy got triggered by jon3k · · Score: 1

      People should be accepted into communities based on skill.

      They are. I'm involved in several projects and no one knows my race or gender. The internet was better when was used nicknames, it was supposed to be that glorious place where no one made fun of anyone based on their appearance and we were all judged based on the quality of our work. It's still possible today.

    3. Re:Poor guy got triggered by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Maybe he will learn how countless others have felt with the unstated rules of discrimination in so many projects, companies, etc.... People should be accepted into communities based on skill. That's not how things are.

      Worked more projects than I can count and nobody even knows let alone gives a shit what everyone else looks like or believes.

      By trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist in the first place by introducing political doctrine you just open the door to unnecessary politics. Politics does not solve problems or implement functionality. It just pushes peoples buttons and wastes everyone's time.

      You don't need a sign telling people to behave themselves anymore than you need a sign telling people not to stick their fingers into electrical sockets.

      Don't like politics creeping in? GOP has been pushing identity politics since before Bush W with the whole marriage ban and sodomy laws

      No quantity of political bullshit has ever contributed to production of even a single LOC.

    4. Re:Poor guy got triggered by goatshadow · · Score: 2

      Poor right wingers, their 'values' under attack.

    5. Re:Poor guy got triggered by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1
      Perhaps you should read what he wrote:

      An excerpt for you:

      The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just writing a good compiler framework.

      Somewhat recently a code of conduct was adopted. It says that the community tries to welcome people of all "political belief". Except those whose political belief mean that they don't agree with the code of conduct. Since agreement is required to take part in the conferences, I am no longer able to attend.

      The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    6. Re:Poor guy got triggered by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Right 'no one knew'...and Caitlyn Jenner is a 'stunning woman'...what color is the sky in your world?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  7. He's not wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The requirements to be able to contributed to a project should be based on merit alone.

    1. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Totally.

      When you look across projects, companies, etc, they just aren't. That's a problem. And what the CoC is trying to fix (whether it's going to work or not, probably not...)

    2. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Brett Bigham. Teacher of the year, fired for being gay. Women's participation in open source projects in general? There's something going on and it's not related to talent.

      There's a cool site called Google now-a-days. You should check it out.

    3. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      How does a LLVM CoC affect other companies or projects? It only affects LLVM. Are you saying that LLVM has a problem that a CoC would help fix?

    4. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Was Brett Bigham involved with LLVM?

    5. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Need an eye-rolling gif right about now.

      http://nymag.com/selectall/201...

      Quilette did not save Damore's shitty memo.

    6. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Read the parent: "When you look across projects, companies, etc, they just aren't."

    7. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You are missing the point. How does a LLVM CoC fix that issue with people being treated badly across other "projects, companies, etc"? Unless there is an issue with LLVM. Does a LLVM CoC help "Brett Bigham" in any way?

    8. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Read the thread, it's talking about contributions to a project, not specific to LLVM.

      I'm agreeing that someone's contributions should be based on merit alone. But then I point out that in the real world, it's simply not.

      I also said the CoC will probably not work.

      It's not about Brett, it's about the way things "should be" against the way that things are. "Should be" world is a great place, it just doesn't exist.

    9. Re:He's not wrong by Holi · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying anything but obviously Chris Lattner is. So instead of asking rhetorical questions here, ask him why he thinks it is important.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    10. Re:He's not wrong by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I don't think it would be a Hawaiian shirt. It would be a shirt that contained images or text that was directly related to the code of conduct. For example, a "shut up bitch" slogan on a shirt.

    11. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      What project did "Brett Bingham" contribute to? It sounds like you want to have a new universal "Code of Conduct" that applies across projects and companies. You people are very scary.

    12. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      I mean, I literally said "I also said the CoC will probably not work."

      Which you've twisted into I want one what applies everywhere. That's some crazy mental gymnastics.

    13. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      I am pointing out that you are going on about "Brett Bigham" which is completely irrelevant to this story. Unless you are proposing some sort of CoC that encompasses all facets of life.

    14. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Your first example was "Brett Bigham" and "when you look across companies and projects". So yeah, it sounds like you do!

    15. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      I was asked for a citation about the world not being about merit alone, I provided it. You are the person who chooses to keep bringing it up.

      It's an example of a person with very high merit (Teacher of the Year) who was subsequently fired anyways. Showing that merit is not the lone factor when going across companies, projects, and organizations. If you'd like more info on minorities represented in open source projects, there are many search engines out there now.

      So, while it may be completely irrelevant to the story, it's not irrelevant to the comment thread, which you seem to be having a hard time grasping. So far you are the only one who keeps bringing Brett up and you are the only one proposing more CoC's as the solution.

    16. Re:He's not wrong by primebase · · Score: 1

      In my world, "merit" includes "being able to work with others without being a dick."

      Apparently, on The Internet Tubes in general these days, that's not a requirement. That message also seems to have not sunk in very far at all with people interested in that project, given the toxic and increasingly clueless comments on the original article at their site. But it certainly is a good definition of "merit" everywhere else. Heck, the first question I ask my team after we interview someone is "Do we LIKE this person?" If they're an unpleasant individual to work with, I don't really care how good they are - they're not getting on my team. I've hired brilliant-but-difficult types decades in the past...never again. They rapidly destroy the team's productivity and cohesiveness.

    17. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      It was my only example, high merit and out of a job for being a minority. There's plenty others on google and out there in general.

      So you think that I think they don't work and I want them everywhere? How do you deal with such incongruencies in your head?

    18. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

    19. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      "I was asked for a citation about the world not being about merit alone,"

      No, you weren't asked that. But you are right. Life isn't fair and not based on merit alone. So it sounds like you want a universal CoC to fix that problem. Scary.

    20. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at the comment thread you are involved in?

      https://developers.slashdot.or...

    21. Re:He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Actually, considering your comments and your mind making up things that I want even though I say they won't work, I'm going to assume no, you haven't looked at this comment thread, and have no idea what you are trying to argue or what point you are trying to make. You should just go back to Youtube, but I know you won't.

    22. Re: He's not wrong by bahwi · · Score: 1

      ....

      You're actually on slashdot right now. I can't believe I have to tell you that.
      CoC's only apply to those organizations, and are usually unenforced and dropped after awhile since they don't work.

    23. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      I took that to mean "projects and companies" in the context of what the article was actually about not "the world". But you are right, the world isn't fair. Your Mommy should have told you that when you were 5 or so. Time to grow up.

    24. Re:He's not wrong by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Link please...I really need a 'shut up bitch' t shirt.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:He's not wrong by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I'll take 'brilliant but difficult' over 'idiotic and difficult, but has tits' (when looking for coders anyhow).

      It's not black and white. Teams that 'run' like a highschool social click are beyond dysfunctional. People that give a shit are considered 'difficult' by those that don't.

      It's true a good team will defend itself as you describe. But beware, politicians lurk. One complete airthief can also destroy a team, unless booted in short order.

      Building consensus on everything is impossible if your team is bigger than 2 or 3.

      These are all shades of grey.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    26. Re:He's not wrong by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1
      Except that is not what is happening. If it were about merit, it would be open to all with an anonymized evaluation process. Instead, internships are being offered not on merit but on gender, race, and sexual orientation:

      You must meet one of the following criteria:

      • You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).
      • You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander
      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    27. Re:He's not wrong by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1
      Brett Bigham:

      Laura Conroy, a spokeswoman for the district, says the two cases are unrelated. She echoed criticism found in an Oct. 20, 2014, district-funded investigation that Bigham had let his Teacher of the Year status go to his head and led to too many absences.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    28. Re:He's not wrong by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Basically, you are saying that the thread is using a straw man fallacy ( some other projects or incidents vs the one that is actually under discussion, LLVM)

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    29. Re: He's not wrong by sexconker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're actually on slashdot right now. I can't believe I have to tell you that.
      CoC's only apply to those organizations, and are usually unenforced and dropped after awhile since they don't work.

      You'd think so, but:

      In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may, in rare cases, affect a person’s ability to participate within them, when the conduct amounts to an egregious violation of this code.

      You're wrong.

      Such codes of conduct, community guidelines, etc. are simply text they can point to whenever they want to blackball anyone who isn't on the SJW team. Oh, you voted for Trump? GET THE FUCK OUT, BIGOT! WE'LL ORGANIZE A HATE CAMPAIGN TO GET YOU FIRED FROM WHEREVER YOU WORK!!! WE'LL HARASS YOU UNTIL A NEW TARGET SHOWS UP!!! Oh, you posted "All men are scum. Kill all men! Whites are the devil. We need a new genocide!!" all over Twitter, Facebook etc.? Well, obviously you're entitled to express your feelings.

    30. Re:He's not wrong by sexconker · · Score: 1

      In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may, in rare cases, affect a person’s ability to participate within them, when the conduct amounts to an egregious violation of this code.

      If someone doesn't like you they'll dig up any dirt on you from any source, show it to LLVM, and LLVM will give you the boot and the SJW mafia will raise a big stink about how you're a monster that shouldn't be able to get a job, house, etc.

    31. Re:He's not wrong by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Or willingness and ability to learn, otherwise how is the next generation expected to gain knowledge and skills?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    32. Re:He's not wrong by tbannist · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure it's an oblique reference to Dr. Matt Taylor that also gets the details somewhat wrong...

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    33. Re:He's not wrong by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Google is your friend.
      https://shop.spreadshirt.com/p...

    34. Re:He's not wrong by Cederic · · Score: 1

      You just inferred he's a dick, which is an insult and also aggressive language.

      Luckily for you Slashdot doesn't enforce the LLVM code of conduct.

    35. Re: He's not wrong by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Goodness gracious. That's not just a Hawaiian shirt, it really makes my point.

    36. Re:He's not wrong by Phillip2 · · Score: 1

      Merit means "being good at something". But being good at what?

      Well, the obvious answer is good at coding, because it's a software project. So, let's make that the thing. Working code wins. Now, someone submits working code, but all comments and variables are all named in Polish, and the rest of the developers speak French.

      So, let's ditch the working code wins argument; working code and the ability to speak French. We've discriminated against the Polish speaker on grounds of his inability, so that's okay, because it's all about merit.

      But now, we get another developer; his code works, and hey, he can speak French. Unfortunately, he spams the mailing list all day with strange stories about his mother which are deep down a bit disturbing and off-putting. So, in the end, we ditch him, because we care about working code, the ability to speak French and not being a bit weird about your mother. And that's okay, because it's all about merit.

      Finally, a developer appears who can speak French, write code, has a totally normal relationship with his mother. All good. And then 14th July happens and the developer starts shouting that Louis XVI was right all along, and offending all the other developers. So, now we have working code, French speaking, okay mother and not being offensive about French national traditions. And that's okay, because it's all about merit.

      "Merit alone" is not a good argument at all. We want a meritocracy. Merit at what? If you really think that ability to code should be the only criteria then say so. Then we can have a nice quick argument which I will win in one minute. Merit alone is an simplistic not simple as possible.

    37. Re:He's not wrong by Kurrelgyre · · Score: 1

      Question: was there anything in the Code of Conduct that was found objectionable?

    38. Re:He's not wrong by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, back here in realityland, we ask for examples to back up your wild claims.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    39. Re: He's not wrong by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Either provide examples of CoCs used in this way (and be prepared to show that they weren't used against assholes that share your politics) or see your doctor about adjusting your meds.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    40. Re:He's not wrong by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      I challenge you to go through my comment history and find a single racist statement I have made (even in disguise). I'll wait.

    41. Re:He's not wrong by epine · · Score: 1

      I'm presently reading Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy (2012) by Christopher Hayes (yes, that guy).

      Chris attended New York's prestigious magnet school, Hunter College High School, where entrance is entirely based on an aptitude test taken at the end of grade five (pretty close to a pure merit system). Guess what? Asian enrollment is soaring, white enrollment is high, black enrollment is near extinction.

      Hayes essentially argues that the "merit" test is primarily testing for environmental privilege (only the wealthy whites and the determined Asians can afford the private tutors, etc.)

      Charles Murray (yes, that guy) argues in his book Coming Apart (2012) that this is exactly what one would expect to see after a generation of assortative mating among the Ivy league elites, where hereditary IQ advantages are a big deal on the thin tail.

      I worked out that Hunter is selecting at about the 3rd S.D. above mean by several congruent Fermi estimates. In this rarefied region of the tail, it takes very little change in mean IQ to create a 10:1 admission differential.

      Anyway, it was just weird to read Hayes describing a problem exactly as Murray predicted it would look, but with no recourse to any of the (increasingly radioactive) debate on assortative mating. It was even weirder that both Hayes and Murray were poking pretty much the same holes in Pollyanna-esque assumptions about meritocracy being an Unvarnished Good Thing.

      And I'm a big believer in ancient Chinese technology.

      According to scholarly consensus, the earliest example of an administrative meritocracy, based on civil service examinations, dates back to Ancient China.

      The concept originates, at least by the sixth century BC, when it was advocated by the Chinese philosopher Confucius, who "invented the notion that those who govern should do so because of merit, not of inherited status. This sets in motion the creation of the imperial examinations and bureaucracies open only to those who passed tests."

      Not even meritocracy escapes the law of unintended consequence unscathed. All tests are dimensionality reduced proxies for the real environment. Even if your test is largely unbiased, it still rearranges your population geographically, and concentrates success into small, elite coteries, who increasingly lose touch with everyone else.

      Not that escalating social division is a problem that can't be solved with the right neighbourly fencing.

    42. Re: He's not wrong by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Oh, you posted "All men are scum. Kill all men! Whites are the devil. We need a new genocide!!" all over Twitter, Facebook etc.? Well, obviously you're entitled to express your feelings.

      Nope, Twitter at least will suspend your account for doing so. Even if #killallmen is satire, they don't want to be in the business of trying to discriminate between satire and fanning the flames of lynch mobs.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    43. Re: He's not wrong by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Yes, but some people can't get past the "terrible suffering" of Dr. Matt Taylor because some people on twitter said his shirt wasn't appropriate to wear for an interview on national television.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  8. Re:How horrable! by greenwow · · Score: 1

    Can't tell if serious or trolling.

  9. Part of a Norm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    As usual, SJW-ism has an effect of demonetization and loss of trust from the normal majority consumers, leading to loss.
    - Hasbro for example managed to bankrupt the GI Joe brand by employing SJW writers into their comic, ruining the brand value.
    - Marvel keeps losing money over the new female "muh womyn power" Captain Marvel, who keeps being rehashed and forced in apparent desperation yet keeps failing and not making returns.
    - Disney's Star Wars has now lost trust among prop sellers, a first in the brand's history. Shelves are filled with unsold TLJ "womyn powa" toys which are going to be written off as a major financial loss for both the sellers and Disney. Now sellers have no alternative but to scrutinize all future Disney's Bolshevik marketing projections and force increased costs on Disney as a risk tax. Disney even lost a potential market of 1.3 billion people in China which cites "Baizuo" and "Low IQ (SJW) writing" as critiques.
    - Video Game developers appealing to a vocal minority of SJW's who don't even pay for games but rather gather around a single "representative" professional critic/influencer via bubbled social contacts to engage in mob criticism/coercion, who are merely there to support that one career critic against products they don't even care about; resulting in a loss of the core majority of consumers and a net loss in revenue due to appeal to vocal minority over majority.
    It's like the religious preachers who exist to preach against products they don't use with fellow church member mobs, yet who are mistaken in ignorance by the object of criticism as consumers.
    - FreeBSD suddenly forcibly coercing/demanding from users to become political "ambassadors" by a Code of Conduct copy pasted from some feminist wiki, completely unrelated to the object of the community or their initial interests in becoming part of it. Result? Skilled staff loss.
    - SJW publications such as Salon forced into adwall.
    - The GNOME foundation running short on money because they wasted it on "The Outreach Program for Women" and such social (in)justice investments.

    Examples keep on appearing exponentially with each day.

    1. Re:Part of a Norm by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      Your thesis picks things selectively and then posits a reason for what is really your selection rather than objective fact. For example, your Star Wars toy line doesn't include any memory of Jar Jar toys.

    2. Re:Part of a Norm by Vapula · · Score: 1

      I'm CS teacher... On the first year, on a total of more than 55 students, we had 6 women (about 10%)...

      But well, it's the opensource communities and IT companies who are discriminating leading to 10% women among the developpers...

      Outreach program is nothing other than a discrimination trying to curb fact to a "politically correct" artificial situation.

    3. Re:Part of a Norm by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I disagree. From my experience this is _not_ the reason for the gender imbalance. The reason is simply that women have, in general, different interests than men. Anybody denying that is at this time is denying solid scientific facts. And that makes the outreach program hugely immoral and repulsive and actually destructive. Don't get me wrong, I am happy to not be teaching IT Security to a 100% male group. But what I can clearly see is that the women in there are not some kind of female warriors that do not care about the discrimination or desire to fight through it. What I see is just "normal" smart women except that they care for technology. And while I am happy that there are some women that do care about technology, trying to trick, convince, pressure or bait women into technology that do not care about it is a huge disservice to both these women and to the technological world. Becoming a good engineer is hard enough if you care strongly about technology and have selected it as your education and career path from your own motivation.

      The absolutely last thing this world needs is bad engineers and outreach programs and all this SJW bullshit are producing exactly those.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Part of a Norm by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The reason is simply that women have, in general, different interests than men .Anybody denying that is at this time is denying solid scientific facts.

      Okay, please provide cites for a few peer-reviewed papers that say that the reason for the disparity is generally different interests. If it's a solid scientific fact, after all, it's got to have several peer-reviewed papers that go back quite a few years.

      Also, even assuming this were the case, you're going back until you find an explanation that suits your personal prejudices and not inquiring further. Why do women have different interests? To give one hypothetical example, if girls with technical interests generally wind up working with boys who don't take her seriously and stare at her boobs, she's likely to drop those interests. How often does this occur? I don't know and I don't think you do either.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    5. Re:Part of a Norm by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Don't be lazy. Go looking yourself.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:Part of a Norm by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You are deranged.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Part of a Norm by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Anybody denying that is at this time is denying solid scientific facts.

      Why should I look for anything? If you know that your claims are solid scientific facts, you should have done enough research to at least give pointers. Heck, there's a good chance I would have encountered such, and I haven't.

      You're the one claiming that your prejudices are scientific fact. I'm doubting you. It's not my job to prove your wild claims.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    8. Re:Part of a Norm by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Prequel toys still sold, in spite of Jar Jar. But walk into any toy store, or toy department, and go to the Star Wars aisle. The toys rot on the shelves. Come back in 6 months, and it's the exact same box still rotting on the shelves, because no one has bought it.

      These guys did just that.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    9. Re:Part of a Norm by Rhapsody+Scarlet · · Score: 1

      I'm constantly amazed that so many people on Slashdot want to put the GNOME Foundations problems down to 'outreach programs' and 'SJWs' rather than the fact that GNOME is piece of shit and nobody wants to use it, hence nobody wants to support the foundation behind it.

      Don't believe me? KDE has its own outreach program for women, yet you don't hear about them having the same problems. Why? Because KDE fucking works, it's perfectly usable (for now at least), so not even the most anti-SJW types give a shit because good software is good software!

      This actually increasingly angers me because it pretends that if GNOME just killed their outreach program, all would be fine, when it obviously wouldn't. So if you just want to talk about the software itself, nobody's stopping you. But if your first criticism of GNOME is a bloody outreach program, then I'd say you're at least as bad as any SJW you criticise.

  10. Actual Quote by Kunedog · · Score: 5, Informative

    He says the reason for abandoning LLVM development after 12 years is due to changes in the community. In particular, the "social injustice" brought on the organization's new LLVM Code of Conduct and its decision to participate in this year's Outreachy program to encourage women and other minority groups to get involved with free software development.

    This paraphrase deliberately attempts to mislead the reader into thinking he is anti-woman and anti-minority.

    http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai...

    The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this.

    He is in fact against discrimination and Outreachy's exclusionary nature.

    1. Re:Actual Quote by sinij · · Score: 1

      This paraphrase deliberately attempts to mislead the reader into thinking he is anti-woman and anti-minority.

      msmash is notorious clickbaiter, so such FUD is to be expected.

    2. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know much about Outreachy. But a program that encourages participation by women and minorities requiring that funding candidates actually be women or minorities doesn't seem at all out of place for the purpose of the organization.

    3. Re:Actual Quote by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ok, so he's not anti-woman and anti-minority, he's anti-outreach to women and minorities to encourage them to participate.

      There's an important difference that was cited on the SO post last week between tolerance and inclusiveness. We shouldn't just be tolerating people, we should be welcoming. If you invite someone to your party and they don't know anyone and everyone else is friends you could say "I did enough! I invited them, it's up to them now!" but we all know how uncomfortable it can be, especially if they are shy, to approach a group of people they don't know. Inclusiveness is not just inviting someone and tolerating their presence but saying "Hey, thanks for coming here are some people I would like you to meet that I think you would get along well."

      He's objecting to the fact that there is an organization that focuses on people just showing up to the party and don't know anyone. While it's true even straight white males from the united states need those same introductions to be included, there are numerous networks that already are performing that duty well. While they may not be explicitly stated as their goal to be "Helping straight white men from America find a welcoming place in the community." the outcome is that they are really well designed to do that. And that's fine too. But we can't pretend that those organizations don't exist.

      This is by the way the UNIX philosophy "Do one thing well". It's great that we have lots of organizations that have organically developed to help one specific set of people (nerdy guys) find a place in open source. But having separate organizations that are focused on different problems is what the Unix Philosophy applied to recruitment recommends.

    4. Re:Actual Quote by bahwi · · Score: 2

      It's the twisting of the word "discrimination" to be always bad. Discrimination is something everyone does everyday. How is it being used? Just to exclude women and minorities? That's bad. Are your discriminating against a restauraunt that was in the news for an E. coli outbreak? That's not a bad use of discrimination or unreasonable.

      For awhile people knew contexts, but lots of people think there is no context now.

    5. Re:Actual Quote by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      He is in fact against discrimination and Outreachy's exclusionary nature.

      Ah, but it's all about who you exclude ... excluding currently disfavored groups is just peachy.

      They literally have institutions that overtly discriminate. But they are "bravely" against ancient institutional discrimination that ended long before they were born.

    6. Re:Actual Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "We shouldn't just be tolerating people, we should be welcoming."

      I love statements like this. Why do people think they have the right to tell others what they "should" do? Arrogance.

      Freedom of speech!

    7. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      I don't know much about Outreachy. But a program that encourages participation by women and minorities requiring that funding candidates actually be women or minorities doesn't seem at all out of place for the purpose of the organization.

      The EEOC appears to disagree with you when it comes to paid internships, Bruce. Absolute bars on consideration for such positions based on race and sex are forbidden.

    8. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      The letter you quoted has nothing to do with an employer running a diversity program. If you want to hear the same voice, EEOC's counsel, on that matter, it's here.

    9. Re:Actual Quote by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      There is a big difference between murder and being rude. You have a right to be rude. You don't have a right to murder. That is what laws are for. That is "how things work". Once thing I have noticed is that young people think they have the right to be "respected" and "not offended". Well guess what? You don't.

    10. Re:Actual Quote by Vapula · · Score: 2

      Basically, by participating to the outreach program, the project is spending money on a most likely sub-par developper (if it was not a sub-par developper, it would not require the outreach program to get a job)

      And the new code of conduct will prevent other to make critics of that sub-par developper...

      End result
      - loss of money that could have been better spend
      - loss of time for the other developpers who will need to fix sub-par code from that developper

      Add that comments around the CoC explicitely says that if racist speech would be punished, reverse-racist speech (ethnical minorities making racist comments against the majority) won't... If homosexual-phobic comments would be punished, heterosexual-phobic comments won't, ...

      LLVM is sinking thanks to the "politically correct" police

    11. Re:Actual Quote by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1
      No, he is objecting to the Code of Conduct saying one thing and then the organization engaging a group to fill internships in a manner that excludes certain races, genders, and/or sexual orientations.

      CoC: Don't discriminate.
      Outreachy: We are going to discriminate in who is eligible to be an intern.

      I have heard many people say "only people with power can be racist". In this case, who has the power? Outreachy has the power.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    12. Re:Actual Quote by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I don't know much about Outreachy. But a program that encourages participation by women and minorities requiring that funding candidates actually be women or minorities doesn't seem at all out of place for the purpose of the organization.

      Well, you can easily learn about them: https://www.outreachy.org/appl...

    13. Re:Actual Quote by boa · · Score: 1

      " If you invite someone to your party and they don't know anyone and everyone else is friends you could say "I did enough! I invited them, it's up to them now!""

      That sounds just like a Seinfeld episode to me :)

    14. Re:Actual Quote by tsstahl · · Score: 1

      Very true, but still illegal in the US as discrimination against a protected class.

    15. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Actually, I don't believe that's true. Read this.

    16. Re:Actual Quote by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Let me paraphrase here.

      "a program that seeks to achieve its aims through sexism and racism doesn't seem at all out of place for the purpose of the organisation"

      I don't know enough about it to agree or disagree, but it seems unlikely the purpose of the organisation is also racist and sexist.

    17. Re:Actual Quote by Cederic · · Score: 1

      there are numerous networks that already are performing that duty well. While they may not be explicitly stated as their goal to be "Helping straight white men from America find a welcoming place in the community." the outcome is that they are really well designed to do that

      Really? Which ones?

    18. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      It's called affirmative action. And we probably need about another century of it if we are to balance out all of the discrimination that has led to the obvious continuing gender and racial imbalance in technology employment.

    19. Re: Actual Quote by Cederic · · Score: 2

      It's called discrimination, and we do not need any of it.

      I'm not in the US, in my country there's also a terrible racial imbalance in technology employment. Despite that I do not support quotas to limit the number of Indians.

      You see, it's pretty fucking easy to treat people as individuals, not stereotypes. Try it.

    20. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I don't think I was having any problem with treating people as individuals. I was however having a problem with various sorts of bigots and haters who didn't like the fact that I was going to hire women and black people and maybe someone gay or someone who's gone through a gender change, if it happened that there weren't very many people like that already in the company. I really have met people who objected to that. I made sure not to use them on projects or in general to encourage them at work. Eventually most of them found their way out of the company. I definitely treated them as individuals through every moment of that.

    21. Re: Actual Quote by Cederic · · Score: 1

      if it happened that there weren't very many people like that already in the company

      That clause could apply to the people you describe as bigots and haters, or it could apply to your reason for hiring people with certain gender or racial characteristics.

      Must be the former, unless in your jurisdiction sexism and racism are legal.

    22. Re:Actual Quote by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      He is in fact against discrimination and Outreachy's exclusionary nature.

      No, he's rationalising. He's against doing anything about existing discrimination. Sure it's buried under heaps of whataboutism and JAQing off, but it's buried under there.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    23. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Actually, the bigots and haters don't last long under my employ.

    24. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      The letter you quoted has nothing to do with an employer running a diversity program...

      True. It said that those offering paid internships were subject to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which coincidentally forbid discrimination on the basis of race and sex.

      On the other hand, the report that you linked to has nothing do to with permitted practices in running a diversity program, and does nothing to refute the statement that "Absolute bars on consideration for such positions based on race and sex are forbidden." You'll notice that the EEOC expressly states that "It is illegal for a training or apprenticeship program to discriminate on the bases of race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. For example, an employer may not deny training opportunities to African-American employees because of their race."

      I don't see "unless you're running a diversity program." Do you?

    25. Re: Actual Quote by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    26. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      You're looking for this: Part 1608 - Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.

      To say that this is a pretty well known piece of employment law would be an understatement.

    27. Re:Actual Quote by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Have you any evidence at all that Outreachy was going to determine the intern candidates for LLVM, as opposed to make suggestions?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    28. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      You're looking for this: Part 1608 - Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.

      I'm aware; I'm also aware that you're ignoring the difference between a permitted affirmative action program and a prohibited absolute bar on the inclusion of members of a certain race or gender. You'll notice that the "Policy Statement on Affirmative Action Programs for State and Local Government Agencies" (41 FR 38814) cited in the regulation does not mention anything approaching such an exclusive program:

      When an employer has reason to believe that its selection procedures have * * * exclusionary effect * * *, it should initiate affirmative steps to remedy the situation. Such steps, which in design and execution may be race, color, sex or ethnic 'conscious,' include, but are not limited to, the following:

      The establishment of a long term goal and short range, interim goals and timetables for the specific job classifications, all of which should take into account the availability of basically qualified persons in the relevant job market;

      A recruitment program designed to attract qualified members of the group in question;

      A systematic effort to organize work and re-design jobs in ways that provide opportunities for persons lacking 'journeyman' level knowledge or skills to enter and, with appropriate training, to progress in a career field;

      Revamping selection instruments or procedures which have not yet been validated in order to reduce or eliminate exclusionary effects on particular groups in particular job classifications;

      The initiation of measures designed to assure that members of the affected group who are qualified to perform the job are included within the pool of persons from which the selecting official makes the selection;

      A systematic effort to provide career advancement training, both classroom and on-the-job, to employees locked into dead end jobs; and

      The establishment of a system for regularly monitoring the effectiveness of the particular affirmative action program, and procedures for making timely adjustments in this program where effectiveness is not demonstrated.

      There is a difference between increasing your efforts to recruit, train, and advance minority applicants in a conscientious manner and imposing absolute restrictions on your applicant pool.

    29. Re:Actual Quote by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Literally nothing in the link you provided asserts that you are allowed to create an absolute bar towards straight white males in order to increase participation from other groups, whether or not it's called a "paid internship" or a "diversity program".

      There is a real difference between outreach (increasing the number of minorities in the pool of applicants), and exclusion (excluding non-minorities from any application). One is justifiable, the other is evil.

    30. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Nothing about the position in question violates those rules. There isn't really an "applicant pool", it's an Open Source project run by volunteers. It's perfectly fine for them to take on a funded intern chosen from a disadvantaged community.

    31. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Maybe the problem in communicating here is that people don't understand that LLVM is an Open Source project. These folks are volunteers who have a non-profit organization that gives away software. There is no employment. The organization which provides the trainee will pay the trainee.

    32. Re:Actual Quote by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      I think the point still stands - the payment for the trainee should be non-discriminatory (along the axes of sexual attraction, gender, and skin tone).

      Again, two options:

      1) creating a non-exclusionary paid trainee program, and encouraging more favored sexual attraction, gender, or skin tone applicants to make a more egalitarian applicant pool;

      2) creating an exclusionary paid trainee program, and discriminating against applicants who do not fit the favored sexual attraction, gender, or skin tone.

      One is obviously justifiable, the other is not.

      Now, perhaps you may disagree, but if stormfront.org created a paid trainee program only for straight nordic males, I'm not sure if you'd be as supportive of their discrimination - even if it directly mirrored the one you claim to be in favor of.

    33. Re:Actual Quote by malkavian · · Score: 1

      Bruce, much as though I respect what you've done for the world at large, how would you react to an organisation that encouraged participation of the majority (say something as sweeping as education), and stated clearly that funding would only be applied if you were a majority (minorities not allowed)?
      The ethics of it is that a meritocracy should be largely blind to gender, skin colour, ancestry and so on. I'm on board with that wholeheartedly. By all means, go and campaign for women and minorities to skill up in the areas you want them to be in.
      When you start dehumanising (I've read the feminist manifestos and "anti-racism" manifestos, and they're scarily like the language used to justify genocides in wording) people and turning away valid, skilled candidates over ideology, I call it a fail on ethical grounds, as well as a regressive step competitively.

    34. Re: Actual Quote by malkavian · · Score: 1

      Bruce, affirmative action is not the correct way to go about things at this point.
      About 6 years ago, there was a systemic imbalance that did actively discriminate. People rebelled against that as being inhumane (which it was). Now the system does actually provide equal access. Not only that, but there are many successful outreach programs that invest in the poor (and it is the generically poor that we need to be granted funded options; that's why I was so angry here in the UK when state funded University places went away to be replaced by more loans, and personal responsibility for paying the tuition fees).
      When you engage at that level, you are helping fix the historical issues that led to the past imbalances.
      What doesn't help is actively discriminating against the majority; that's when you're using the same thinking that was found to be abhorrent, and applying it to a majority. That is crass, and unhelpful.
      When you look at the movement of demographics in society, it's very easy to see the huge changes in the last couple of generations in the West. And it's pretty balanced these days (it'll take maybe another few decades for some of the older entrenched mindsets to vanish by die off, but they don't have much in the way of power and control in everyday life).
      Looking back through history, I've found most trends to be reminiscent of damped transient oscillations around a mean; society, as far as women's right and minority rights is largely center, to being slightly biased towards minorities. Yet there is still an increasing vocal contingent that is after actively discriminating against a set (and using dehumanising methodologies to do so, which to me is intolerably obnoxious). This is the overshoot on the oscillation. And the stronger that contingent make themselves over the coming decades, the stronger the backlash will be when it occurs.
      What society has now, which it didn't 60 years ago, is a general acceptance. The world has become smaller, and more unified.
      What isn't needed so much now is the band aid of affirmative action (that was justified in years gone by, but after the couple of generations now of having equal access to the same education and chances of anyone else, is much less relevant, towards being self-defeating these days).
      On the racial side, Asians and Indians were discriminated against just as much as anyone else. And now they're a very large contingent of the tech community.
      On the gender imbalance, you look at the most 'inclusive' countries in the world, and female engagement with tech is still very low. The more thorough the studies are into the gender imbalances, the more it seems to be a "choice", rather than some murky nefarious discriminatory group that keeps being alluded to. I've yet to see a decently controlled study that has found anything _but_ that.
      It's much the same with teaching, nursing, (increasingly medical doctors, which have a huge female bias these days) biological sciences and so on, except the other way round. Yet nobody complains about that. Or that the majority of trash collectors are men.
      Hell, I taught all my nieces to code, and got them science kits. One went into music, one into the nursing profession, one into conflict studies and one into biotechnology (now with a PhD). All four of them find general tech on the computing side to be not that interesting. They have other tech that does interest them, and that never seems to be rolled into the treatment of "technology" as addressed in these circles.

      The rules that I consider fair are just "Don't discriminate". Give people the resources to achieve what their talent and drive will allow them, and give them the choice of what direction to go.
      When it comes to selection, let each person prove themselves.

    35. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Nothing about the position in question violates those rules. There isn't really an "applicant pool"...

      There isn't an applicant pool?

      We're so excited to have you apply! The application process for Outreachy is longer than most internship applications, so we highly encourage applicants to start their application at least 2-3 weeks before the Outreachy application deadline. The application process consists of five steps:

      1. Make sure you're eligible to apply for Outreachy. We have strict eligibility rules for people who are students, so it's important that you confirm you're eligible.

      ...it's an Open Source project run by volunteers

      Which exempts it from EEOC regulations how? Because they're not paid by the Outreachy organization based on performance in specifically assigned tasks?

      Internships Start Mentors officially begin guiding their interns on the project work.
      Mid-term Review Mentors provide mid-internship feedback to Outreachy organizers and indicate whether interns should be paid the mid-term payment.
      Final Review Mentors provide final internship feedback to Outreachy organizers and indicate whether interns should be paid the final payment.

      It's perfectly fine for them to take on a funded intern chosen from a disadvantaged community.

      Yes it is - but that was never the issue. It is not perfectly fine for them to absolutely bar those not from a disadvantaged community from applying for paid interships.

    36. Re:Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Nope. It's not even employment. There's a travel stipend.

    37. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I am embedded in tech communities. I can tell you for sure that some have a 100:1 men:women ratio and close to that in caucasian to anything else, and there is continuing need for improvement.

      I would like to know where all of these anti-discrimination activists were when Martin Luther King led a march on Washington. And more modern iterations of the same thing. Were they fighting the fascists, or were they the fascists themselves?

      I am still not getting that the proponents of this nonsense are real anti-discrimination activists at all. Some of them are self-deceiving, some know better.

    38. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Well it turns out the trainees aren't actually paid. There's a travel stipend.

    39. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Nope. It's not even employment. There's a travel stipend.

      So we'll just pretend that the other $5500 is not compensation because there's a $500 travel stipend.

      Are you even trying at this point? Or simply channeling Sarah Sanders?

    40. Re: Actual Quote by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I would have a really hard time surviving in Silicon Valley on $5,000 for 3 months. Even if they made some arrangements for housing and food. You go to court and prove that is employment. I'm not holding my breath.

    41. Re: Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      I would have a really hard time surviving in Silicon Valley on $5,000 for 3 months.

      Hell of a non-sequitur... why do they have to be in Silicon Valley, exactly?

      You go to court and prove that is employment. I'm not holding my breath.

      I already showed that it was, in the initial post that you are now chosing to ignore.

    42. Re: Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1
    43. Re:Actual Quote by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Maybe the problem in communicating here is that people don't understand that LLVM is an Open Source project. These folks are volunteers who have a non-profit organization that gives away software. There is no employment. The organization which provides the trainee will pay the trainee.

      Too bad that's not how it works.

      "Intern selection
      Participating communities go through the applications in the Outreachy application system, and select the applicants they want to accept as interns. If they have strong applicants that they don't have funding to select, they can ask the Outreachy organizers to provide additional internship funding from the Outreachy general fund. Outreachy organizers will also work with existing sponsors to try to find additional funds.

      Internships
      Mentors officially begin guiding their interns on the project work.

      Mid-term Review
      Mentors provide mid-internship feedback to Outreachy organizers and indicate whether interns should be paid the mid-tem payment.

      Final Review
      Mentors provide final internship feedback to Outreachy organizers and indicate whether interns should be paid the final payment."

      The intern is not an independent contractor and therefore is an employee. Outreachy, not the organization, pays the trainee. At most the organization is the indirect contributor (tax deductible, no less) of a donation to fund Outreachy's employment of the intern.

    44. Re: Actual Quote by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Damn. That was "savage", as the kids say...

    45. Re: Actual Quote by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You take the cake comparing this anything that MLK was addressing. Rather shameful.

    46. Re:Actual Quote by jrumney · · Score: 1

      That is why supporters call it "affirmative action" these days.

    47. Re: Actual Quote by malkavian · · Score: 1

      Bruce, I suspect you know population statistics as well as I do.
      By saying you have a close to 100:1 ratio in anything doesn't actually tell you a single thing. A clearer signal would be to say "What's the employment rate in candidate cohorts?".
      If you find, say, that there's an 8% unemployment rate in the caucasian set, and 8% in non-caucasian, or an 8% in male, 8% in female, then the system is stacked (probably) fairly; it'd be giving you a reasonable signal that a woman has just as much chance of getting a role in the sector as a man, which is what equality is all about (an equal shot for everyone).
      Now if you find say, that there's an 8% unemployment rate in men compared to a 2% rate in women, that tells you that (probably) something nefarious is going on, and one of the prime factors in you getting a job is to be a woman. And that's just silly. It'll breed resentment (you're not creating a job that'll magically help women with no side effects. What you're actually doing is actively discriminating against men, just because "numbers". You are blatantly refusing a man a job because he's a man.

      I know you're very firmly embedded in the tech community, so the answers to the unemployment rates and attrition rates from the field would be generally more available to you; it'd be interesting to see if you could ferret them out. What I'm hearing though various studies is that there's no structural barrier to women entering the field at all, so the discrimination against the more populous cohorts present in the field is just tokenism.
      A good study, with proper controls and meta analysis against various studies could convince me to change my mind, but I'd like to see it treated properly, rather than just an exercise in tokenism.

    48. Re:Actual Quote by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Look, there is a way for Outreachy to speak to "historically under-represented" people without specifically excluding "historically over-represented" people; however, that is not what has been done.

      You are on the wrong side of the argument. Enjoy. :)

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    49. Re: Actual Quote by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      I think you're trying to find some level of triviality that I would agree that outright discrimination is a good thing - but I don't think there really is any trivial discrimination, especially when you can accomplish the same goal *without* discriminatory means.

      For example, let's say that only favored minorities were given a cookie for applying for a non-discriminatory position - not just given information and encouragement to apply for the job to increase their representation in the applicant pool size without denying the opening to others based on sexual orientation, gender, or skin tone. I would still object.

      Give everyone a cookie :)

      Again, I reach this conclusion by making sure I feel the same way no matter what specific sexual orientation, gender, or skin tone group is substituted. If the KKK wants to encourage young straight white men to apply for a non-discriminatory position, in an attempt to overwhelm the applicant pool with their favored sexual orientation, gender or skin tone, so long as the position is open to even competition between applicants, I've got no problem. But if the KKK is only giving out cookies to young straight white men, it crosses the line.

      At the end of the day, explicitly discriminating against people by sexual orientation, gender, or skin tone has to be predicated on the following assumptions -

      1) without such restriction, your favored sexual orientation, gender or skin tone would be uncompetitive and have essentially 0% chance even if they were 99% of the applicant pool;
      2) without such restriction, your favored sexual orientation, gender or skin tone would be discriminated against (even if the hiring process was supposedly non-discriminatory) and have essentially 0% chance even if they were 99% of the applicant pool.

      #1 seems to be selling the applicants short, and represents the soft bigotry of low expectations.

      #2 seems to be selling the HR department short, and represents a terrible assumption of discriminatory intent.

      I would argue that the proper solution, if you believed either 1 or 2, would still be attacking the root problem (improving competitiveness, ensuring non-discrimination), rather than forcing discrimination into the process to try to compensate for a perceived problem.

    50. Re:Actual Quote by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

      "Add that comments around the CoC explicitely says that if racist speech would be punished, reverse-racist speech (ethnical minorities making racist comments against the majority) won't."

      Could you share a link for this? I can't find anyplace where it says that.

    51. Re:Actual Quote by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      Probably the fact that in the other articles about this it specifically mentions that yes, this is what they are going to be doing, and the fact that it's the wife of the project founder spearheading the effort and made the announcement, then I would take a wild guess and say, "Oui!"

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
  11. Meet minimum standards of human behavior by XXongo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I have to say, looking at the Community Code of Conduct he's objecting to, I'm finding it hard to figure out what exactly he doesn't like. This is the code of conduct:

    be friendly and patient,
    be welcoming,
    be considerate,
    be respectful,
    be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others, and
    when we disagree, try to understand why.

    the only part of this that I can possibly think he might object to is the fifth one, which some people might consider suppressing free speech, but this is elaborated in the next paragraph as meaning:

    Harassment and other exclusionary behavior aren’t acceptable. This includes, but is not limited to: Violent threats or language directed against another person. Discriminatory jokes and language. Posting sexually explicit or violent material. Posting (or threatening to post) other people’s personally identifying information (“doxing”). Personal insults, especially those using racist or sexist terms. Unwelcome sexual attention. Advocating for, or encouraging, any of the above behavior.

    all of which seem reasonable. If he wants to violate what seems to be pretty bare-minimum standards of what should be considered acceptable behavior, I'd say that he should leave the community. And not join a different one.

    1. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by xanthos · · Score: 4, Funny

      Obviously you are not a Linux kernel developer.

      --
      Average Intelligence is a Scary Thing
    2. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      If these are the minimum standards, why even bother writing them down ?

    3. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would you treat someone as an equal or with respect just because they have boobs or have a certain skin color? Very odd. People should be treated as equals and/or with respect if they deserve to be based on their behavior. I wouldn't treat Donald Trump with respect, because he doesn't deserve it. It doesn't matter if he has boobs or if his skin color was different.

    4. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So, basically, it sounds like he's taking issue with the fact that they expect him to treat dark skinned people and people with boobs as equals and with respect. We all know that's crazy talk and the work of the evil SJW conspiracy. (If you can't tell that I'm speaking sarcastically, you need help.)

      No.

      "The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry".

      In other words, he's the one who is against discriminating on sex and ancestry, and the project has officially taken leave of that.

    5. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      Bingo. Too understated as well. An organization that specifically chooses to exclude one gender, and only benefit the other gender is basically an organization that discriminates based on sex.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    6. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by apoc.famine · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As it's gone way beyond setting "reasonable boundaries" and right into territory of trying to dictate someone's idea
      of what manners should be.

      So setting baseline manners for a large-scale group project is a bad idea in your mind?

      Personally, I'm more than happy for people like you and him to get angry, stomp your feet, and leave when you're asked to behave reasonably well in order to be part of a community. Makes the community a better place for the rest of us.

      Go ahead, make a hostile, bitter community of your own, with blackjack and hookers.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    7. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you're missing the point - it's not about treating women and minorities with respect because of their differences - it's about NOT treating them with disrespect because of them. i.e., treating them at least as respectfully as you would if they were white men, and perhaps slightly more so in deference to the fact that you're interacting across a cultural divide, and it's thus easier to inflict unintentional hard feelings, on both sides.

      If you can't effectively call out someone's idiocy without mentioning their their race or gender, perhaps you need to consider that your real problem with them has nothing to do with idiocy.

      In addition, if you can't call someone's idiocy in a social setting without being unnecessarily cruel and disrespectful, perhaps you need to work on basic social skills a bit more before trying to join a collaborative project.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    8. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Personal insults, especially those using racist or sexist terms.

      That is very, very broad these days, any sort of criticism has been proven to fall under that.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    9. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If that is "the point" then why doesn't it say that in the CoC? I do love your addition about "slightly more so" though. We are all equal, but some people are more equal than others I guess. Truly Orwellian.

      "If you can't effectively call out someone's idiocy without mentioning their their race or gender"

      Huh? Who said anything about doing that?

      "In addition, if you can't call someone's idiocy in a social setting without being unnecessarily cruel and disrespectful"

      Huh? Who said anything about that? You SJW types are really truly scary.

    10. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by robkeeney · · Score: 4, Informative

      No he said that what clinched his decision to leave was

      The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2).

      which comes from Outreachy's possibly illegal discriminator eligibility requirements here: https://www.outreachy.org/appl...

      • You must meet one of the following criteria:
        • You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).
        • You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander

      Outreachy is explicitly discriminating based on skin color and ethnic heritage, as well as gender identity, excluding white cis-men.

    11. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by tbannist · · Score: 2, Informative

      No.

      "The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry".

      In other words, he's the one who is against discriminating on sex and ancestry, and the project has officially taken leave of that.

      Except that statement is materially false. His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source. That part is materially true. However, since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy because he's already participating in the open source movement. My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations. I really think the first reason he listed is the primary reason for leaving and that was that as the project has grown, it has become more difficult to make big meaningful changes, he just needed an excuse that he feels doesn't make him feel like he's leaving the project because it's too mature for him.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    12. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's not hard to actually read what he says: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/122922.html

      Note:
      "The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that
      openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes
      directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project
      to not be associated with this.

      [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-February/121161.html
      [2] https://www.outreachy.org/apply/eligibility/"

      He objects to "openness and tolerance" policies which pretty much flatly state "white men need not apply".
      That's not very inclusive in his and many other's peoples' eyes. That's judging a man by the color of his skin, not the content of their character - the exact opposite of what MLK and the rest of the original civil rights activists wanted.

    13. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are missing his point. It is about him being associated with an organization (through his association with LLVM) that he thinks discriminates based on sex and ancestry. Not that he was afraid of being discriminated against.

    14. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      I have to say, looking at the Community Code of Conduct he's objecting to, I'm finding it hard to figure out what exactly he doesn't like. This is the code of conduct:

      It doesn't make sense because it's not what triggered his leaving.

      Read what he actually posted to the mailing list not the intentionally misleading edit contained within TFA.

      all of which seem reasonable. If he wants to violate what seems to be pretty bare-minimum standards of what should be considered acceptable behavior, I'd say that he should leave the community. And not join a different one.

      Personally I would hope people would be grown up enough to tolerate those who are not friendly, patient, welcoming, considerate or respectful.

    15. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      If you can't effectively call out someone's idiocy without mentioning their their race or gender

      The CoC doesn't allow you to make anybody feel uncomfortable. Calling out someone's idiocy is therefore not an option, period.

    16. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think what people react to is some fairly infamous mis-applications. For example, when David Howard was fired for using the word 'nigardly', or a couple guys getting fired because they had a brief snicker over the word 'dongle' that was overheard. In general, it's a bad situation where such a tempest can be raised when offense is taken even when it was not given.

      Things like that have given the term "code of conduct" a bad reputation even where there is no intention of such behavior. It's like an organization that wants to give candy and flowers to people having a bad day names itself "the fourth reich".

    17. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Your fallacy there is Strawman.

      What argument was he misrepresenting?

      Just because someone reasonably rejects to an insane overbearing code of conduct requiring people "Welcome everyone," or some such similar bullshit: does not mean that person embodies the antithesis on every topic that code of conduct says something about.

      Why do you think "be nice" is "an insane overbearing code of conduct"?

      No one other than you suggested treating dark skinned or people with boobs in any unusual or particular way.

      Well according to him, he rage quit because llvm partnered with Outreachy to get more "dark skinned people and people with boobs" working in the project and because the code of conduct told him he couldn't be mean to people. Combining those two reasons makes the racist/misogynistic claim seem plausible. Now, I think the guy's lying about the reason he left, because I think it's really that there's too much structure to the project now. I think he's scapegoating the policy and Outreachy to justify his leaving because he's been unhappy with the project for a while and unable to articulate why.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    18. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      I have to say, looking at the Community Code of Conduct he's objecting to, I'm finding it hard to figure out what exactly he doesn't like. This is the code of conduct: be friendly and patient, be welcoming, be considerate, be respectful, be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others, and when we disagree, try to understand why..

      all of which seem reasonable. If he wants to violate what seems to be pretty bare-minimum standards of what should be considered acceptable behavior, I'd say that he should leave the community. And not join a different one.

      I agree wholeheartedly. I read his "goodbye" email carefully, word by word, to get to the truth of what he said. http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai... - He says he us unable to attend LLVM conferences because he does not agree about the code of conduct. More precisely, the conference pages https://llvm.org/devmtg/2018-0... say "By registering for this event, we expect you to have read and agree to the LLVM Code of Conduct". I assume that "agree to the code of conduct" means "agree to abide by the code of conduct". If he can't agree to those minimum standards of acceptable behavior, then sure he shouldn't be admitted to the conference.

      As for "being associated with" -- well, okay, though it seems pretty wishy-washy. I disregard the media practice of saying "X is associated with Y which is associated with Z". It's a sloppy shorthand way of attacking X for something that X didn't actually say or do.

    19. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Megol · · Score: 1

      I think another reason is more important, as quoted from ( http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai... ):
      "...
      The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that
      openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes
      directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project
      to not be associated with this. ..."

      My personal opinion:
      It is sadly becoming more common to support people with some "sexual identity" or some specific genetic lineages ("races") while not being a _general_ support of underrepresented or disadvantaged groups. That's just sexist and racist, no way to sugar coat that. Do your part and don't associate or support extremists.

    20. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's be clear. That organization practices reverse discrimination in order to bring more women and minorities into the industry.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    21. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also from their website: "Outreachy is a paid, remote internship program that helps people traditionally underrepresented in tech make their first contributions to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) communities."

      It would seem to make sense to exclude white males since they are not traditionally underrepresented in tech. Would it not? Just like it would make sense to exclude boys from GEMs club.

      There's a shortage of talent in tech, so we need to figure out how to get more skilled people into the field. Women are severely under-represented and no, it's not because they're just not as good at it. The number of female CS graduates has been dropping since the 80s when I graduated. Why? Are the women of today genetically less capable of grasping code than the women of 30 years ago? Nonsense.

      It could be because it's not seen as a desirable vocation for a woman, and just maybe that's not something inherent to coding itself. And maybe just getting more women into coding will encourage other women to make that choice.

    22. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Halo1 · · Score: 2

      I think you're missing the point - it's not about treating women and minorities with respect because of their differences - it's about NOT treating them with disrespect because of them

      If that is "the point" then why doesn't it say that in the CoC?

      It does. It says to be equally welcoming to everyone.

      --
      Donate free food here
    23. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem is that "disrespect" is based on the perception, rather than the intent, and there's an inherent conflict of interest in a review setting (like in any quality-control process or collaborative effort).

      I'm very passionate about what I do. It's part of what makes me good at what I do, because I actually care about doing a good job, rather than just hitting the magic "40" on my time card and getting a paycheck. I will not hesitate to call out anyone's stupid failures. Mistakes or lack-of-training issues are fine, and we will accept those and move on, but failure due to being inattentive or simply lazy is not acceptable, and anyone failing in such a way needs to be aware that they're not performing up to the standards expected of my team. Frankly, I don't care what gender you are (or aren't), or how old you are, or your socioeconomic status, or really any other factor than whether you do the job. In my opinion, I'm perfectly in compliance with any nondiscrimination policy, because I don't discriminate.

      To someone else's perspective, though, they think I'm complaining because they're black, or Jewish, or young, or blonde, or whatever particular insecurity they want to call out, because they're too inattentive to understand that they were actually doing something wrong.

      The moment discrimination is brought up, especially in an enterprise with a "Code of Conduct" that is venerated above producing quality results, it's no longer a discussion about the right way to actually do the job. It's a discussion about sensitivity, and framing discussion, and having nice polite conversations with 3 HR reps and two managers, at whatever time they can all fit a discussion into their schedules. By the time that discussion takes place, the same failures have been repeated three times, and now there's a quality-control issue that needs to be addressed. Of course, that actual process issue has now become "normal", and any further complaint about the failure is just more "harassment".

      In the end, the person who noticed the original problem is punished, the problem persists, and weeks of effort are wasted on what could have been fixed in five minutes of candid discussion. There have been many cases where this process has itself been abused to attack anyone who dares to complain about someone who is more skilled at gaming the management than actually doing their job.

      As an alternative to a flawed "Code of Conduct", I suggest simply an environment of open failures, along the following lines:

      • If you screw up and you realize it, tell the team.
      • If you see someone else screw up, tell them or the team lead.
      • If you are told you screwed up, you are responsible for finding the document that describes the process.
      • Calling out someone who is, in fact, correct according to the documentation is itself a screwup.
      • Anyone on the team may contribute to the documentation.
      • Every day that you work with this team, you are joining a team. Everyone here is useful in some manner, regardless of whether or not you know what that manner is. You do not have the right to question anyone's participation in this team, though you may question how they do it as described above.

      In short, if you want to say someone's wrong, it had better be something that's either not yet documented, or the document supports your opinion. It's very difficult to put discrimination into writing without making it obvious, especially when it's a document that anyone else can fix. At the same time, encouraging people to admit their own mistakes prevents hero worship and excessive egos. It's much easier to take a complaint when you know that your competency is not also under attack.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    24. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by robkeeney · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you are all for discrimination against disfavored groups, as long as they're the groups you disfavor?

    25. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      What does "equally welcoming" have to do with anything we are talking about? The words never even appeared in this thread. You guys are totally nuts.

    26. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Informative
      You got it all wrong. Here's what he said

      http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai...

      The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just writing a good compiler framework. Somewhat recently a code of conduct was adopted. It says that the community tries to welcome people of all "political belief". Except those whose political belief mean that they don't agree with the code of conduct. Since agreement is required to take part in the conferences, I am no longer able to attend. The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this. [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai... [2] https://www.outreachy.org/appl...

      The Outreachy link does say they do not accept males that are caucasian, European, Asian or Arabic. I think he's right for leaving, I would not want to be part of a group that actively discriminates either.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    27. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      There are fewer female kernel contributors because Linus is really mean on the LKML. If he would be nicer, there would be more females contributing to the kernel. And the kernel would be much better as a result.

    28. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      What does "equally welcoming" have to do with anything we are talking about?

      Being disrespectful because of people's race/gender/etc is not welcoming to said people.

      --
      Donate free food here
    29. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Hopefully "equally welcoming" means a lot more than that. We should all be equally welcoming no matter what, right?

    30. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The problem is that "disrespect" is based on the perception"

      The concept of "respect" is much different in the younger generations. It used to be that you earned respect through your actions and abilities. Now young people think that "respect" is a right, no matter what.

    31. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.

      No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.

    32. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      That's like laying Victoria Secret discriminates against men because they only do women's clothing.

      I can shop elsewhere, and I could apply directly to LLVM. You dont have to go through Outreachy.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    33. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't "disfavor" white males, especially since I am one, nor do I advocate for discrimination based on groups one likes or dislikes. In this case, since being a while male is not a barrier to getting a job in tech but not being one can be, I have no problem with an organization providing services specifically to help those who are not white males get jobs in tech.

    34. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by yet+another+SanTiago · · Score: 1

      be friendly and patient, be welcoming,

      Well, the world is not black and white. Not being welcoming does not mean being hostile. Not being patient does not mean being impatient.

      People want their emotional autonomy. While reasonable person would have enough self-control to not act hostile even if feeling that way, requirement to act friendly instead of just neutral/professional (with the implicit threat of persecution if the behavior is not friendly enough) is clearly over the top. That is emotional labor and it is degrading even for cashiers and waitresses, who are required to do that. No need to accept that just for contributing to an open-source project.

    35. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations.

      Well, that's lovely that you can read his mind and know his motivations better than he can, but ... his stated primary reason is not wanting to be associated with Outreachy, which does discriminate based on sex and ancestry.

    36. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by ljw1004 · · Score: 2

      No he said that what clinched his decision to leave was ... [The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry]

      Read his resignation letter. He wrote two separate paragraphs:

      (1) He is unable to attend LLVM conferences because he is cannot agree to [abide by] the code of conduct. This is what the post you replied to "meet minimum standards of human behavior" was talking about. I too wish to know which parts of that code of conduct he considers himself unable to abide by.

      (2) What clinched his decision to leave was that LLVM is now associated with outreachy, and he himself didn't want himself to be associated indirectly with outreachy.

    37. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Fringe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He isn't being asked to behave "reasonably well"; he's being asked to sanction discrimination. And you openly being happy to exclude people because they don't agree with you, when they BUILT the community, is pretty much his point of the problem... you haven't helped the community or committed code, but you come in and apply SJW (his term) values.

      Of the two of you, one is behaving as an intolerant bigoted bully... and it isn't him.

    38. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Being disrespectful because of people's stupidity is not welcoming to said people...

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    39. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by internet-redstar · · Score: 1
      It's clear he considers the 'Outreachy' program - which tries to increase the representation percentage of various minority groups (gays, transgenders or black US Americans) - to be some kind of discrimination.

      Ironically, the 'outreachy' project announced it will not participate in the LLVM internships. (link

      So, basically it's much ado about nothing.

      I would say that most racists aren't known for their intelligence. This might be an exception. Or I might be completely wrong, I don't know this idiot ;)

    40. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by internet-redstar · · Score: 1, Interesting

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.

      No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.

      It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.

    41. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by apoc.famine · · Score: 2

      Can you please explain how that Community Code of Conduct sanctions discrimination? I'm having a hard time linking "be considerate" and "don't dox people" with discrimination.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    42. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      However, since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy because he's already participating in the open source movement.

      Let me get this right. Either ...
      a) it's not discriminatory
      or
      b) he's not allowed to say it's discriminatory
      or
      c) he's in no position to judge that it's discriminatory ... because *he* isn't *personally* affected?

      Do you have any idea how retarded that sounds? Do you have any idea how retarded it is?

      P.S. What does "it is mission" mean?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    43. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      That is true. It violates the CoC too:

      "We strive to be a community that welcomes and supports people of all backgrounds and identities. This includes, but is not limited to members of any race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, colour, immigration status, social and economic class, educational level, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, size, family status, political belief, religion or lack thereof, and mental and physical ability."

      So, everyone is welcome. All ideas are welcome and considered equally.

    44. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      It keeps the people who don't like them out, because they want to violate just that sort of rule, and they realize this project won't be their playground.

      Sorry, that's trivally provable to be false, by observing that it is keeping out at least one person who *didn't* violate nor ever indicate any intention to violate that sort of rule.

      What selectively enforced rules do is keep out everyone who is against discrimination in any form.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    45. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Except that statement is materially false.

      No, it's not. He does not want to condone an organisation that is discriminatory, and Outreachy is pretty fucking clearly discriminatory.

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.

      Where did he state that claim? It wasn't in the note he sent to the mail list. I think you just made that up.

      since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy

      What the fuck does that have to do with it? You can't rape me pregnant but trust me, I catch you on top of a screaming lady there's going to be what the police would describe as an incident.

      My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations

      That's because you don't understand his reasons or motivations. The issue here is not him.

      he just needed an excuse that he feels doesn't make him feel like he's leaving the project because it's too mature for him

      That's an interesting suggestion but in no way invalidates the actual reason he explicitly gave for leaving the project.

    46. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is that the sentence reads exactly the same whether you use the word 'reverse' in it or not.

    47. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      It is easier to look at something easier to measure, like strength: it is obvious that men are stronger, on the average, than women -- so no one insists that a wood-cutting company employs 50% female lumberjacks -- but also, because individual variance trumps averages

      According to the IAAF anybody that's strong enough to be a lumberjack isn't female.

      Individual variance now disqualifies you from the group: https://www.iaaf.org/news/pres...

    48. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by GWXerog · · Score: 1

      There's a shortage of talent in tech

      There is 'No' shortage of talent in tech. That's a line of garbage used by large American tech firms so they can hop onto the H1B train. What there is a shortage of is decent job postings. I keep in this dead end $35k support job because it's stable, full time and comes with great benefits. Every time I go out looking for those mythical $60k+ jobs they're all contract work that's guaranteed for no more than a year. But that's not a problem if you're here on a work visa or an H1B

    49. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      -i disagree with you
      -omg you are literally hitler.
      Yeah, we know those perfect sjw shit are interpreted. Everything you say can and will be used against you in the code of conduct.
      How many those humble social justice shits were humble? All i've seen is a mob against individuals.
      And this bs about "we respect his decision/opinion" is usual pretentious rhetoric. They are happy that he left...and now they are no foreigners into the team. You haveto agree with them in order to work with them.
      Did anyone respect the mozilla's ceo a few years back? No, he wasn't aligning with the, so he got kicked.
      How many LOC do you have to contribute in order to be able to add things to the CoC?

    50. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      You do realise that you just wrote

      It would seem to make sense to [be racist and sexist]

      Hopefully you can understand why some people might disagree.

    51. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      That is some *really* bad logic, chief.
      This is the problem people like you often have, you Bell Curvers-
      Your data isn't wrong, but your data doesn't really support your conclusion better than any of the other side's conclusions- that massive systemic discrimination exists. And frankly, they have more evidence for their conclusion than you have for yours.
      You aren't just cherry picking data, you're cherry picking logic processes applied to the data. Trying to pretend like you're half-stupid to make your point, but you're not. And I suspect that somewhere, deep down inside, you *know* you're wrong. You just think you can bullshit other people by being clever.

    52. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Just because someone reasonably rejects to an insane overbearing code of conduct requiring people

      And yours is Begging the question
      I'm not sure which is worse.

    53. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If he can't agree to those minimum standards of acceptable behavior, then sure he shouldn't be admitted to the conference.

      This is bullshit, and you know it. First of all, having to explicitly agree to this to attend a conference is like having to pledge allegiance every time to get food in a mess hall (as mocked so brilliantly in Catch-22 — great read).

      How would like you like a daily popup on /. asking you to promise not to molest children today? Your probably would not... But, if you can't agree to that (much lower!) minimum standard of behavior, why should you be allowed to have Internet?

      Seriously, like most corporations, LLVM has no separation of powers. The same people writing the Code of Conduct, are the ones enforcing it... Having it simply gives them a weapon to enforce their point of view.

      And we know — from their choosing to associate with the trash like Outreachy — what that point of view is...

      "Common sense is not too common" goes the saying. The code asks you to be "respectful" — what does it mean? If one were to show up to a conference in a T-shirt with a picture of AR-15, or a portrait of President Trump, would that be Ok? I've worked with people IRL, who'd file a complaint with Human Resources over such a thing — because they'd "feel unsafe". And it could get worse!

      Likewise, what if a woman encounters an obvious man in a female bathroom — because he is "genderfluid" and felt feminine at the moment the nature called? Would the woman's negative reaction be "disrespectful"? By the standards of the Social Justice assholes, who'd consider yoga practice to be racist, it certainly would be...

      We've been slowly boiled by these asshole for years. This man is a hero for raising awareness of this growing threat to our freedom.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    54. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by liefer · · Score: 1

      Nerds telling other people how they should behave socially, with absolute certainty... That's rich

    55. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter if [...] his skin color was different.

      Good. Because it is orange. I would not want to discriminate against our new Orange overlords. Especially since they rule my country already.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    56. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      You would have to be a perfectly impartial person to think that discrimination and reverse discrimination are morally equivalent.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    57. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Uhm no, you're disregarding what I'm calling the "Bible studies effect": if a majority of researchers of a subject come with a preconceived bias, they will produce more studies and more literature that promote their point of view. Thus, it might seem that there is a certain consensus. Another example is the notion that somehow male circumcision reduces chances of AIDS transmission. And so on, so on.

      Another thing is: out of eight sentences in your post, you presented zero actual arguments, yet somehow thought it fitting to include quite a few insults. I don't believe these belong in a post that starts moderation at +2.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    58. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      While respect is something you earn, a respectful treatment of anyone until proven otherwise is probably a good stance to take. There is a difference between the two.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    59. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I guess you're right. People that claim they're doing 'reverse' discrimination are morally bankrupt as well as ignorant.

    60. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Junta · · Score: 1

      The problem I've seen is that some people have called out idiocy without even *knowing* the person's race or gender, and *still* got accused of racism/sexism when the race/sex of the insulted one is highlighted in the aftermath.

      In the second argument, it can come down to what is considered 'unnecessarily' cruel and disrespectful. This rather subjective thing can became a problem when two people simply disagree. Even if it's a purely technical difference of opinion, people take things personally and will either avoid saying something they should say out of desire to be polite, or start painting a reasonable discussion as insensitive because one party doesn't agree.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    61. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 1

      You do realise that you just wrote

      It would seem to make sense to [be racist and sexist]

      Hopefully you can understand why some people might disagree.

      I realize that somebody changed my words and is making a false equivalence.

      I understand that people will disagree with me on lots of topics. Hopefully they can do so (or not) while considering what I actually wrote in its entirety.

    62. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      As long as you're a woman, you're fine. The problem is with individuals who have organs of both genders. You see, human gene code is written so badly that it puts the worst Visual Basic PHP node.js code monkeys to shame -- whoever designed it sure wasn't intelligent. Most of the time it doesn't even compile (fails before or short after implantation).

      Yeah, the split is somewhat arbitrary, but without it, we would have to exclude all true women from most sport disciplines (and men from some like gymnastics), leaving only men (if it was complete free-for-all) or genetic hybrids (if the rule stopped at "mostly female").

      Neither coding nor lumberjacking has any reason to care about gender, so any discrimination of any kind, either negative or "positive", is entirely, completely harmful.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    63. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I realize that somebody changed my words and is making a false equivalence.

      On what fucking planet is 'it makes sense to exclude [race] [gender]' not racist and sexist?

      I'm terribly sorry, I thought I was in a conversation with someone with basic reading comprehension.

      I understand that people will disagree with me on lots of topics. Hopefully they can do so (or not) while considering what I actually wrote in its entirety.

      I did, but what you wrote in its entirety is predicated on accepting your repugnant suggestion that racism and sexism are acceptable. They're not.

    64. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      And quit confusing me for him.

    65. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      It's really easy to say you're against discrimination in any form when that discrimination has put you on top and now somebody else is trying to rectify the situation. Remember this is about putting exactly one gender or race different person on the LLVM project. Maybe he should have been out objecting to the conditions that made the project predominantly white, male, and purportedly cis-gendered. Although of course some of that started before he was born. Objecting to someone attempting to solve the problem now certainly doesn't put him in the right.

    66. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter that he has boobs or his skin color is different.

      FTFY.

    67. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 2

      It's really easy to say you're against discrimination in any form when that discrimination has put you on top

      It's even easier to say you're against discrimination because you're against discrimination.

      Objecting to someone attempting to solve the problem now certainly doesn't put him in the right.

      "Attempting to solve the problem" by offering more discrimination sounds like something everyone should object to. Like I told you in another response:

      Affirmative action and equality are mutually exclusive. You can't have both.

      You are now engaged in attempting to shame someone purely because they expressed the thought that discrimination on the basis of sex is a bad thing. The shaming doesn't work. Stop it.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    68. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But this CoC goes much further than just prohibiting insults. It's a direct assault on certain political, religious, philosophical beliefs and attitudes that one may hold and espouse outside of the project.

      For instance, the welcoming clause mentions supporting everyone regardless of their "immigration status". I assume that means if your status is considered to be illegal (or undocumented if you prefer) you are still welcome in the project. But suppose there is an LLVM developer who is politically opposed to DACA (in the US) and supports a moratorium on taking in refugees from certain countries with majority Muslim populations. And suppose that LLVM developer has contributed money to PAC's and political campaigns in support of his position on those issues. And also suppose that - using his real name on the internet - he posts messages on various social media platforms that espouse said political positions. And also suppose that he's never once made a statement about immigration at any LLVM conference, or on any LLVM mailing list, or irc channel, or any other LLVM community venue. IOW, he's completely separated his political view on immigration from his work and communications with others in the LLVM community. He kept it separate until that one time when he was asked about his views by another developer at a LLVM conference who happened to be involved in immigration activism and truthfully explained his position.

      My question: Did the LLVM developer commit a CoC violation?

    69. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It would seem to make sense to exclude white males since they are not traditionally underrepresented in tech.

      That doesn't make it less illegal to do so. At least have the decency to pretend to have a fair process and find some excuse to implement a discrimination based corporate agenda.

    70. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Well, the law supports my performing affirmative action in my company's employment, so I'm going to go on hiring folks who need a lift up, and feeling good about it.

    71. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mi · · Score: 1, Insightful

      political belief

      So, I have to "be welcoming" to Communists, Nazis, and KKK among coworkers?

      Wow...

      and mental [...] ability.

      And idiots too? That's some "code" — for a software project...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    72. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Go ahead, make a hostile, bitter community of your own, with blackjack and hookers.

      We're all already here, why do we need an additional one?

    73. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by belthize · · Score: 1

      Not sure exactly when the folks decided that advocating for a group was the same as discriminating against that group's complement but they're wrong.

      It's entirely possible to advocate for and not be anti-white guy.

      Full disclosure, I'm an old white guy.

    74. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Fringe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      His resignation letter specifically referenced the "social injustice movement" and the Outreachy program... which is very specific and very discriminatory. Of course, an "Outreach" program by definition is trying to "reach out", but that doesn't make much sense in a faceless meritocracy such as an open source code base.

      And that is part of his point... the code of conduct shouldn't require tolerance for any "political belief"; political beliefs shouldn't be part of the code discussion at all. (Hence his use of the word "permeated.")

      What you're missing is that you're relying on the reporting rather than reading his letter and following the link in his footnote.

    75. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Well, the law supports my performing affirmative action in my company's employment, so I'm going to go on hiring folks who need a lift up, and feeling good about it.

      Yeah, the law supported Nazi Germany too. Look how that turned out.

      Your appeal to legislation is pointless anyway - I did not claim that it's not legal, I claimed that you can't have both equality and affirmative action.

      You picked affirmative action. Good for you. Now why are you castigating those who pick equality?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    76. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by war4peace · · Score: 1

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source. That part is materially true. However, since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy because he's already participating in the open source movement. My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations. I really think the first reason he listed is the primary reason for leaving and that was that as the project has grown, it has become more difficult to make big meaningful changes, he just needed an excuse that he feels doesn't make him feel like he's leaving the project because it's too mature for him.

      Not protesting when changes occur that worsen the status quo is cowardly. Are you suggesting such behavior as the right one?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    77. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 1

      I realize that somebody changed my words and is making a false equivalence.

      On what fucking planet is 'it makes sense to exclude [race] [gender]' not racist and sexist?

      I'm terribly sorry, I thought I was in a conversation with someone with basic reading comprehension.

      I understand that people will disagree with me on lots of topics. Hopefully they can do so (or not) while considering what I actually wrote in its entirety.

      I did, but what you wrote in its entirety is predicated on accepting your repugnant suggestion that racism and sexism are acceptable. They're not.

      Is it sexist and repugnant for me to insist that the person I marry not be a male? If that is "sexist", then I'd suggest that sometimes it's OK to be sexist. If you don't consider that to be sexist, then why not?

      Are you suggesting that I'm a racist and a sexist because I'm OK with there being services targeted at those that have suffered from racism and sexism? Interesting.

      I'm not arguing that a white male can't be a target of real racism or sexism, but they generally are not when it comes to getting tech jobs.

      Let's start where we probably agree: It's wrong to not hire a person for a tech job because they're black. That would be racist. Now, let's say I want to help that black guy and others like him get jobs in tech because for lots of reason including racism, there's not a lot of black guys in tech jobs. I don't dislike white guys but since the fact that they're white and male already gives them a leg up in getting tech jobs, I don't want to spend my resources to help them because they don't need the kind of help I'm providing. Is that racist? If so, then I'm OK with it in this instance.

    78. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's a bizarre statement. What does religion have to do with anything? Who asked about his religion?

      He says that the code of conduct for excludes him because of his political views, but doesn't elaborate exactly what views he means.

      It really seems like he left for some other reason and just decided to put the boot in.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    79. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Now why are you castigating those who pick equality?

      Because they aren't picking equality. They are preserving their own entrenchment.

    80. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      First of all, having to explicitly agree to this to attend a conference is like having to pledge allegiance every time to get food in a mess hall (as mocked so brilliantly in Catch-22 — great read). How would like you like a daily popup on /. asking you to promise not to molest children today?

      On the subject of great reads, we could read the T&C of the LLVM conference that I linked. You don't *explicitly* agree to the code of conduct. Agreement is implicit by registering for the conference. So no, it's really very dissimilar to reciting the pledge of allegiance every time to get food, and it's very dissimilar to a daily popup on slashdot.

      The code asks you to be "respectful" -- what does it mean? If one were to show up to a conference in a T-shirt with a picture of AR-15, or a portrait of President Trump, would that be Ok? I've worked with people IRL, who'd file a complaint with Human Resources over such a thing -- because they'd "feel unsafe". And it could get worse!

      Again on the subject of great reads, the code of conduct does indeed say what it means by being "respectful" (albeit in a vague way): no personal attacks, good behavior, good manners.

      I'm having a hard time understanding the point you're making with your link. There was a student who had agreed to the school dress code and then either did or didn't violate it. The police officer attempted to get to the bottom of it but was hindered because the student wouldn't stop talking. The police officer thought this amounted to obstruction of justice but due process decided it didn't. I don't see how that relates to a conference situation.

    81. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Because they aren't picking equality. They are preserving their own entrenchment.

      It's easier to castigate the other side when you dehumanise them, right? When someone says "I'm sorry, I can't be associated with that movement because I am an egalitarian", your interpretation of that into "I need to maintain the power imbalance" is irrational.

      Here's a thought - you can equalise the imbalances by removing yourself from the industry. Why haven't you?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    82. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 1

      There's a shortage of talent in nursing, so we need to figure out how to get more skilled men into the field.

      Right? We need to have nursing programs that EXCLUDE women? 'No Women need apply'???

      Is that right?

      You WANT to exclude women from nursing programs, so we have 'balance'?

      http://www.aamn.org/

      There are actually lots of initiatives to get more men into nursing including scholarships for nursing programs available only to men.

    83. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And you openly being happy to exclude people because they don't agree with you,

      I'm openly happy to exclude people who diagree with me on certain things. For example some people think I should be murdered and I disagree and I'm happy to exclude them over that disagreement.

      when they BUILT the community

      Chris Lattner has a better claim to that than this diva and he's in favour of the code of conduct.

      Of the two of you, one is behaving as an intolerant bigoted bully... and it isn't him.

      So you've just noticed a little fragment of the paradox of tolerance and believe you've stumbled onto something profound. You haven't and it's been hashed out so many times before.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    84. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Gosh. That's sophomoric.

    85. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This seems to be yet another misunderstanding. I'm not sure what he thought the code of conduct said but it's hard to see what he could possibly be upset about in it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    86. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Gosh. That's sophomoric.

      If only it were.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    87. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by war4peace · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's no such thing as "reverse discrimination".
      You either discriminate or you don't.
      The law says "you should not discriminate", no exceptions.
      So they want to bring more women and minorities into the industry using illegal methods, period.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    88. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      When someone says "I'm sorry, I can't be associated with that movement because I am an egalitarian",

      Whenever someone says that they're complaining about someone trying to change the status quo. Oddly nothing ever satisfies those self-proclaimed "egalitarians" when it comes to maintaing the satus quo. Oddly the distinctly non egalitarian status quo doesn't seem to bother them at all.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    89. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by war4peace · · Score: 1

      There are fewer female kernel contributors because Linus is really mean on the LKML.

      Probably.

      If he would be nicer, there would be more females contributing to the kernel.

      Maybe. However, there is not enough information to confirm that assumption.

      And the kernel would be much better as a result.

      Is that wishful thinking?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    90. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Is it sexist and repugnant for me to insist that the person I marry not be a male? If that is "sexist", then I'd suggest that sometimes it's OK to be sexist.

      Would you really insist that though? I think you would insist that the person you marry is someone towards whom you hold strong and romantic feelings.

      It happens that the set of people that qualify aren't male.

      This helps with your other point too.

      the fact that they're white and male already gives them a leg up in getting tech jobs, I don't want to spend my resources to help them because they don't need the kind of help I'm providing. Is that racist?

      Fuck yes it's racist. You've labelled an entire demographic and done so because you want to give someone of a specific race a job.

      How about you ask the guy whether he even wants a job in tech.
      If he does, how about you explore and understand why he can't get one. (Hint: Racism is illegal, so that's almost certainly not the answer).
      Once you've found the underlying cause, address it.

      But what you'll find is that the underlying cause is one shared by many people. Is it an educational gap? Is it a criminal record putting off potential employers? Is it a language barrier? Is it suitability for the role?

      None of those need me to know the race of the person facing that challenge. But those are things you can address. You can provide training, change policies, change the nature of roles. What you'll find is that many people will respond positively to those changes, and those people will include your black guy and other people that comprise multiple genders and races.

      I'm OK with it in this instance

      I'm not, and not just because I'm not as racist as you. I also think your approach is inherently flawed and causes too many new issues, all of which can be avoided by doing something more intelligent in the first place that doesn't discriminate based on race.

    91. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Not his primary reason, just the last straw after a number of bizarre and vague issues that he doesn't explain.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    92. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Of course, an "Outreach" program by definition is trying to "reach out", but that doesn't make much sense in a faceless meritocracy such as an open source code base.

      Whenever I see a picture of someone in F/OS, it's almost always a white male. This means that (a) white males are inherently superior in F/OS development, or (b) there are forces discouraging women and nonwhites. I think it's worth investigating.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    93. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by myid · · Score: 1

      Outreachy is explicitly discriminating based on skin color and ethnic heritage, as well as gender identity, excluding white cis-men.

      In the US, they're excluding men and women who are not black, Hispanic, native or Pacific Islander. So men and women are excluded, if they're white, or if they're non-Pacific Islander Asians.

    94. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Are you attempting to claim that the group that makes up the vast majority of the contributors is disfavoured?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    95. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      He seems to think he can't say it's discriminatory, but the code of conduct says he can and no one has complained about him doing so.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    96. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      " All ideas are not created equally, and not all ideas deserve the same level of consideration"

      BINGO. Someone gets it. Being 100% inclusive is sheer stupidity. But that is what people are taught. All ideas are equally valid. No opinions are wrong.

    97. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      So, I have to "be welcoming" to Communists,

      Lol Communists. Did one of them sap and impurify your precious bodily fluid or something?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    98. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Programs and attitudes like "Outreachy" are literally barriers to white males getting jobs in tech.

      *Removing* barriers from others should not include *raising* barriers for some.

      If you ever find that there is a program that hires only white males, and raises a barrier to those who aren't white males, the answer isn't to create an ideologically opposite but equally discriminatory program, the answer is to remove the discrimination at its source.

      Similarly, if the problem is that some HR reps have inherent barriers to non-whites and non-males, the answer isn't to create HR reps that have inherent barriers only to white males.

      You need to remove the discrimination, not simply reverse its polarity.

    99. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mi · · Score: 1

      Agreement is implicit by registering for the conference.

      "By registering to attend you agree to abide by the Terms of Conduct". That's quite explicit.

      (albeit in a vague way): no personal attacks, good behavior, good manners

      You concede the vagueness. So, I ask you again: suppose a woman finds a man in female bathroom... Is he violating the ToC with his bad manners, or is she violating the ToC by disrespecting his "gender fluidity" and "personally attacking" him?

      I'm having a hard time understanding the point [...]

      No, you are not, stop pretending. The point is, various people consider various things "offensive". I gave examples, you chose to ignore them, so I ask again: what if another attendee objects to my wearing a "MAGA" T-shirt? Am I offending his political beliefs — in violation of the Code of Conduct, or is he trying to suppress mine — in violation of same?

      Can you guess, which side will win, if the decision-makers consider Outreachy to be a wholesome organization?

      Do you really pretend to not understand, how this "ToC" not merely "has a potential" for abuse by people seeking to further their SJW agenda, but was created to be so abused in the first place?

      you're making with your link

      That it is possible, in today's America, to not only be expelled from a conference over a perfectly legal item of clothing deemed offensive by Social Justice Warriors, but have police be summoned over it — with a subsequent arrest.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    100. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by jimtheowl · · Score: 1

      "I would hope people would be grown up enough to tolerate those who are not friendly, patient, welcoming, considerate or respectful"

      Indeed. As far as IT coworkers, I would take competent over all of those combined.

      Further, I can always let someone know he/she is not being one of the above, but you cannot let anyone know they are not competent unless you are willing to be labeled as one or all of the above.

    101. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      But the CoC demands respect throughout, even if the person ends up losing the right to it. Many people do not deserve respect.

    102. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mi · · Score: 1

      Lol Communists. Did one of them sap and impurify your precious bodily fluid or something?

      Why, yes, they've organized a genocide, which wiped out millions of people in a country I'm from. Does that justify my subjective revulsion in your opinion, or do I need to add, that, objectively, they argue for and seek to further the most murderous school of thought known to humanity, one well ahead on that ignominious record even of the Nazis? And you do hate the Nazis, no "lol" about it, is there?

      But thank you for confirming, even if implicitly, that — according to your reading of the CoC — Communists will, indeed, have to be tolerated. Why am I not surprised...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    103. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Whenever someone says that they're complaining about someone trying to change the status quo.

      Regardless of what you imagine their ulterior motives may be, the fact remains that equality and affirmative action are mutually exclusive.

      So, even if your characterisation of every single egalitarian is correct, if your own position lies on the affirmative action side you're anti-equality.

      You can justify an anti-equality position to yourself and others, but doesn't mean your justification is anything more than cognitive dissonance leaking out your mouth.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    104. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by jimtheowl · · Score: 1

      I know I'm taking a chance here, but how different could his skin color possibly be?

    105. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by malkavian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No gender or skin colour is going to cost you a job in tech. If it did, there would not be the large Asian and Indian presence in the roles that there are now.
      In the places that are the most inclusive of all (such as Sweden etc.), there are still very low numbers of the groups in roles. This indicates that choice is a fairly large factor (and seems that the more "free to choose, rather than forced to work to survive" you are, the more men overall take up the roles, and women look elsewhere.
      It's also illegal to discriminate based on gender or colour of skin, yet this is blatantly being done. If you want to raise the best talent you can, open the doors, and let people prove themselves. Take the best and the world improves. Force ideology onto things, and you're going to find yourself in a less than optimum situation, where the person that takes "that internship" will forever be looked on as "someone that could only get it because they're (x)", not someone that's achieved.
      It's a massive insult to someone you way want to nurture in the first place, as they'll have that stigma, perhaps even detracting from a real talent (hey, if they're talented, why not hire them anyway?).
      I keep hearing "It's so hard to get a job in (x) if you're a (y)", but see nothing in real numbers of qualified people complaining about it (you can bet it'd hit news pretty quickly). It seems it's the "everyone knows it" type of fallacy; everyone's being told that's what's going on, so people believe it. Despite very little evidence of it being true.

    106. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      So, even if your characterisation of every single egalitarian is correct,

      Not every egalitarian, but the self proclaimed ones, yeah.

      You can justify an anti-equality position

      Ah yes, white is black and anyone who atually tries to make things more equal is actually anti equality. Only people who sit on the sidelines and whine are the true egalitarians.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    107. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And you do hate the Nazis, no "lol" about it, is there?

      Well, it doesn't make you sound like you're a grumpy old fart who misses the 1950s, so it doesn't make me chuckle.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    108. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by imnotanumber · · Score: 2

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.

      No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.

      It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.

      Yes! Putting 'positive' before is the answer!
      I can't wait for the next 'positives':

      - 'Positive vandalism'
      - 'Positive burglary'
      - 'Positive corruption'
      Better: 'positive evil'! Yes...

    109. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      No one has a "better claim". Everyone is equal and every idea is equally good. You SJW can't even maintain coherency for more than five minutes. Calling him a "diva" would violate their CoC by the way. You guys have made such a mess.

    110. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      No one has a "better claim".

      A curious philosophy.

      Everyone is equal and every idea is equally good.

      Seems unlikely.

      You SJW can't even maintain coherency for more than five minutes.

      You mean I can't maintain coherence with whatever notion is currently flitting through your head? Well thank god for that!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    111. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      " Well, it doesn't make you sound like you're a grumpy old fart "

      Ah, an ageist comment from a SJW. You should be forced the read your comment history. You would have been kicked out of the LLVM for CoC violations by now.

    112. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      "By registering to attend you agree to abide by the Terms of Conduct". That's quite explicit.

      No, it's implicit. Implicit means that it's implied by registering, rather than being an explicit statement.

      Let's verify that we're talking about the same case. Rafael said he does not agree to the terms of conduct. He didn't say that he thought there are vague edge cases (which indeed there are). He said he could not to the code.

      Actually there's a logic gap. The conference says someone must agree "to" the code of conduct. That's an unusual linguistic construction. I understood it to mean "agree to abide by the code of conduct". But Rafael also said he did not agree "with" the code of conduct. The two are separate concepts -- people often agree to abide by laws even ones they consider unjust, for example.

      I think it would be entirely normal for a social group to expect members to abide by its code, and entirely unusual for a social group to expect members to buy into its code. I'm therefore assuming the first interpretation. (This assumption is dodgy because Rafael himself has blurred the distinction in his own letter).

      Working through your examples in the specific case of Rafel:

      Your restroom example - do you think Rafael is the male who insists on going into the female bathroom and feels this is disrespectful to the women at the conference and nevertheless insists on going? (To stay focused, I'm not looking at example edge cases about who might or might not be offended; I'm wondering why he said he could not agree to abide by the terms of conduct).

      Your MAGA example - is Rafael the one wearing the MAGA T-shirt who feels this is disrespectful and nevertheless insists on wearing it?

      However the point of your examples seems to be different. You seem to be suggesting that he feels he can't abide by a commitment to be respectful, because there are cases where he will be respectful or at least he feels he will be respectful, but other people might take his actions as disrespectful. Am I understanding you right?

      That's very tenuous reasoning. If that were true, he would be able to agree to the terms of conduct (because he himself would say he's being respectful), but he would be in fear of unjust accusations or an unjust decision process. Fear of unjust accusations/process is a reasonable fear, and your T-shirt case was a good example of it.

      So I guess in the end we don't know, and the words as literally written don't unambiguously direct us: (1) maybe he feels he can't abide by the code of conduct himself; (2) maybe he doesn't agree with the code of conduct because of its content or vagueness or inherent contradictions; (3) maybe he doesn't trust the organization's ability to enforce the code of conduct with balance and fairness.

      I'm drawn to (1) because I think that's what the conference was expecting and what he said he couldn't agree to. If someone's okay with (3) then they'll likely be okay with (2). You gave examples of both (2) and (3).

    113. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's true of the ones that caused infamous incidents as well. The problems tend to come in the uneven execution.

      For example, expecting someone to apologize and admit guilt for using a racial slur when they did not, but not expecting the other party to apologize for hearing a slur that wasn't there and making honestly horrible accusations against the speaker and admit to that guilt.

      I'm not saying that would happen here, just explaining the misgivings many have when they see a code of conduct pop up where before there was just an unwritten expectation that people behave decently. Once there is a rule on paper, it becomes too easy to quickly hang someone from the yardarm without due consideration. Without the written rule to point at and call for blood, there tends to be more discussion of whether or not offense was given and a more informal discussion that gets the point across without being overly heavy handed.

    114. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      That isn't why he quit. You should read what he actually wrote sometime.

    115. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You should be forced the read your comment history.

      I do, frequently. It's awesome!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    116. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      Discrimination is discrimination.

    117. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You can't even help yourself from calling him a "diva"! You wouldn't survive at LLVM. That is a CoC violation. You better start cleaning up your act.

    118. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You better start cleaning up

      I have started by cleaning up this thread! zing!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    119. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      10 int

      10.0 float

      '10' string

      This isn't complicated.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    120. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      If "awesome" means it contains frequent violations of the LLVM CoC then I agree.

    121. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Simple minded answers. Also a weasel's definition of 'white'...your including asians this time aren't you?

      The distribution in FOSS devs mirrors the distribution of qualified college grads.

      If something bad or unnatural is affecting the demo, it's happening right around puberty. That's a simple fact, but has no simple explanation. Maybe tits do make you worse at math, maybe tits just enable their owner operator to get men to do the hard work for her and it gets to be a habit.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    122. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I'm sorry, straight white dudes aren't the smartest fuckers on the planet."

      CoC Violation detected. By the way, you types always assume there is a long line of non-white males that are dying to become coders. Amazingly not everyone thinks your life is so awesome that they want to do what you do.

    123. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mi · · Score: 1

      But Rafael also said he did not agree "with" the code of conduct.

      His point is perfectly clear — he rejects the very requirement to have to agree to accept this "code". And I agree with him. Why I agree, I think, is clear from my earlier posts — so this one will be the last.

      My examples show, how this code can be abused to suppress free expression — what role (if any) would Raphael himself play in them is irrelevant.

      This abuse potential is so strikingly clear, any suggestion that it is simply a "bug" in the code, is a lie or extreme naivete — it is obviously so by design. People, who wrote it and made it a governing document, did so deliberately, because, like all authoritarians, they seek to ban things they do not like.

      I applaud Raphael's rejection of this authoritarianism and hope, he'll find much better employment elsewhere.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    124. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by internet-redstar · · Score: 1

      His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.

      No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.

      It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.

      Yes! Putting 'positive' before is the answer! I can't wait for the next 'positives': - 'Positive vandalism' - 'Positive burglary' - 'Positive corruption' Better: 'positive evil'! Yes...

      Maybe an English dictionary can help for your twisted mind?

      link

      positive discrimination

      noun [ U ] UK /pz..tv d.skrm.ne.n/ US /p.z.tv d.skrm.ne.n/ uk

      the act of giving advantage to those groups in society that are often treated unfairly because of their race, sex, etc.

    125. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      SJW's will _kill_ a project

      That's their job. They are social assassins sent in to destroy a community's defenses so that it's ripe for a hostile takeover.

      Why was Brendan Eich targeted for his political views of a decade ago? Because somebody wanted him out of his position at Mozilla so that something could be done with the organization that he wouldn't allow. The drama was all a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

    126. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by paulpach · · Score: 1

      all of which seem reasonable

      Code of Conducts in general sound so reasonable, it is hard/impossible to disagree with any of them.

      But if you read it, you can see that it is very vague, subject to interpretation. This means it can be selectively applied when convenient. Whether intend it or not, it simply becomes a power grab by the committee.

    127. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Immerman · · Score: 1

      No, absolutely not "some are more equal than others". I'm sorry if I wan't sufficiently clear.

      Any time you're talking across a cultural rift, the potential for misunderstandings and hurt feelings is increased, and good graces demand you make a little more effort to be understanding and respectful, because such extra effort is almost certainly required in order to have functionally the same conversation as with someone in your same culture group.

      Women should be a little more careful of their words when talking to men. And men should be so when talking to women. Same with whites/blacks/hispanics/asians/etc/etc/etc. Misunderstandings are more likely, and so more effort is required by *everyone involved* to deliver the same amount of social courtesy.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    128. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What language lets you write binaries numbers like that? I call bullshit.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    129. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by peppepz · · Score: 1

      Hypocrisy. Being outraged because somebody else (not him!) is willing to pay a symbolic amount of money for a woman to have an internship working on the project, is just like being against charity because it discriminates against non-poor people.
      The truth is that he's the one pushing a political agenda into an otherwise technical environment, using the weight of his programming skills to make as much noise as possible while he theatrically slams the door.

    130. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "a couple guys getting fired because they had a brief snicker over the word 'dongle' that was overheard"

      One, not both, got fired. But so was the woman who made a fuss over their joke.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    131. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "It used to be that you earned respect through your actions and abilities.
      Now young people think that "respect" is a right, no matter what"

      Not quite. There has always been plenty of people who demanded respect undeservedly, usually for accidents of birth or for merely having survived longer than most.
      This is the backlash, as many have been exposed as nothing more than high-status scumbags.
      Perhaps the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction but let's not pretend that it was ever really truly appropriate.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    132. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by haruchai · · Score: 1

      My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations.

      Well, that's lovely that you can read his mind and know his motivations better than he can, but ... his stated primary reason is not wanting to be associated with Outreachy, which does discriminate based on sex and ancestry.

      He comes across like a disgruntled old boy who's quitting the country club because they've started letting in the women, Jews and the blacks and telling him he can't refer to them as wenches, kikes & pickaninnies

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    133. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      I lol'd. For real.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    134. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by sjames · · Score: 1

      Nevertheless, someone got fired for snickering about "dongle". The woman being fired didn't re-employ him.

    135. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Nice backtrack. "treating them at least as respectfully as you would if they were white men, and perhaps slightly more so". "Women should be a little more careful of their words when talking to men. And men should be so when talking to women. Same with whites/blacks/hispanics/asians/etc/etc/etc. "

      It is amazing how you SJW like to divide people into groups and tell those groups they "need to be more careful" talking to other groups. You are also really good at telling everyone "what they should do". Disgusting. You are truly despicable.

    136. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You SJW sure love those personal attacks don't you? You don't even realize you have violated the CoC. So stupid.

    137. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by unimacs · · Score: 1

      Programs and attitudes like "Outreachy" are literally barriers to white males getting jobs in tech.

      *Removing* barriers from others should not include *raising* barriers for some.

      If you ever find that there is a program that hires only white males, and raises a barrier to those who aren't white males, the answer isn't to create an ideologically opposite but equally discriminatory program, the answer is to remove the discrimination at its source.

      Similarly, if the problem is that some HR reps have inherent barriers to non-whites and non-males, the answer isn't to create HR reps that have inherent barriers only to white males.

      You need to remove the discrimination, not simply reverse its polarity.

      I'm a white male and programs like "Outreachy" have no meaningful impact on my ability to contribute to open source projects or make a living in tech. And I think you'd be hard pressed to find a qualified white male who could not get a job in tech because of Outreachy.

      Something to think about. How does one remove discrimination? Make it illegal? Does that really remove it? Tell people to stop doing it? What is its source? Black people are still asked to pre-pay for food in restaurants that don't ask the same of whites. They are still stopped by police for no other reason than they are driving in a white neighborhood. And they get kicked out of starbucks for not ordering something while white people are allowed to stay. Women are still payed less for doing the same job. All this in spite of the fact that just about everyone recognizes that these practices are wrong.

      Further, I don't see programs like Outreachy reversing the polarity of discrimination. All they are doing is making sure a few electrons flow in the other direction while the vast majority of electrons are still going the same direction they always have. I wouldn't advocate or stand for a process or program that drove white males out of the tech industry to the point that those that remained represented a small fraction of their portion the whole population. But for some reason a lot of us think its OK that there are relatively few women in tech fields and don't really care to figure out why or what could be done about it.

      Something else to think about, even if you could "remove discrimination at its source", removing the cause doesn't necessarily fix the damage. Simple example. Let's say the brakes fail on my car causing me to smash into my neighbor's fence. Does fixing the brakes (the cause) also repair the busted radiator, the lights, or my neighbor's fence? Of course not. Let's take it a step further and say that I've already been fighting with my neighbor because he lets his dog pee in my yard. He thinks my running into his fence was retaliation when it was a complete accident. He's seeing malice where there was none. Just like today sometimes people see discrimination when the real explanation is something else. But that's because there's been a history of discrimination that led them to believe that.

      To summarize, fixing the cause isn't enough on it's own to repair the damage. Sometimes that requires deliberate action.

      Anyway, this is a very complex subject. I don't see the lack of women in tech as solely the result of discrimination. That's another reason why I don't see removing the discrimination on its own will fix the problem.

    138. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by chaboud · · Score: 1

      I think by "mental ability", they're trying to avoid discrimination against people with learning disabilities, neuro-atypical expression, etc.

      However, stupidity expressed as bad code should be called out and shamed/trained into happening less often. If I hadn't been thoroughly dressed down by more competent engineers early on, I'd probably still be cranking out awful code.

      Training and skill development can't be all carrots... Sticks are incredibly effective when used properly.

    139. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      You didn't mention whether or not you can code. Here's all you rabid hideous slashdotters unable to understand basic human decency, railing against a perfectly reasonable and normal code of conduct that presents the apparently novel notion that it might be a good idea to be nice to each other for a change, and forgetting to mention the only thing that you claim should matter.

      That's interesting.

    140. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Are you nice to people, generally, in your life?

      Do you normally treat people with respect, in your life, irrespective of their sex/gender/race/whatever?

      If you were working with someone, and they were, say, rather fat, and you found their work of a poor standard, would you raise this issue with them without bringing their obesity into it? Or would you call them, say, a "fat idiot", and revert their code?

      Now, I don't know you, other than that you appear to be fairly argumentative and opinionated, neither of which I consider to be character flaws - quite the opposite in fact - but I suspect your answers to the above questions would put you on the right side of the code of conduct under discussion.

      Am I wrong in my assumption?

    141. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by onepoint · · Score: 1

      How funny and true, this is from my perspective of the coding in the 70's to the 90's.
      I figured from 2010 onwards this would have stopped, but I guess not.

      I really can not figure out why, but that's another thread.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    142. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      It used to be that you earned respect through your actions and abilities.

      That's right. In the olden days people earned respect by being born into aristocracy, or by not being black, or by being a man rather than a woman. The world was better then. People knew their place. Now everybody wants respect, and reading this thread, it seems to me like there isn't going to be enough respect to go around.

    143. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      This is where we differ, and this is fundamental. I believe that everyone deserves respect, though they may also, depending on their actions, deserve punishment of one sort of another.

    144. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by onepoint · · Score: 1

      I am from the school of cream rises to the top.
      with that said, not all ideas make it to the top.
      you are doing a literal translation of the statement instead of project leader standpoint.

      Ideas are tossed into the hat. then it's shared, My perspective is that people want brainstorming, not presentation skills that charm you into doing something that you don't want.

      again I could be totally wrong.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    145. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by haruchai · · Score: 1

      I'm neither a SJW nor a triggered LLVM coder. But nice try, troll

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    146. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      This whole situation seems like a made up problem. I work on several open source projects that have thankfully not be subjected to one of these codes of conduct, but I honestly have no idea what the race/sex/whatever of at least 75% of the people I regularly work with. It doesn't matter. It's only an issue when generally less talented people want to dictate how everyone else should act. Enforced fake niceness, with a nice thick coating of legalism.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    147. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      The paradox of tolerance is the dumbest argument I see put forth regularly on topics like these. There is no paradox. The assumption is that hearing intolerant views inevitably leads to more people being intolerant, but that has simply not been demonstrated.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    148. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      >You dont have to go through Outreachy.

      That's the thing. Nobody does.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    149. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      You don't read his letter, did you?

    150. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Huh, so he didn't read the code of conduct before rejecting it. Interesting.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    151. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Oh my brother, don't you see? Those are the *intended* applications of these anti-democratic CoCs. Witch hunting is the driving goal behind them, not some unfortunate implementation bug.

    152. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      #Bigot

    153. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Fight racism and sexism with more racism and sexism! Preach, silverspoon social justice broham, preach!

    154. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Wow, silverspoon broham, your country club sure is bigoted. Thankfully us proles who don't have a country club don't have that problem to worry about.

    155. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Yay for illegal employment discrimination! Fight sexism with more sexism!

    156. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Socjus trolls sure do love anti-democratic authoritarianism.

    157. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      I wasn't presenting an argument. I was calling you out for being a disingenuous shitstain.

      Arguing with you about whether or not your conclusion that "a small percentage of women contribute to open source, ergo if your company employs anything close to an equal ratio of men and women, you are discriminating" would be the paramount of stupidity, because that conclusion is too stupid to fucking argue.

    158. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by peppepz · · Score: 1

      An internship is not employment. This is people paying for the training of a person that they believe wouldn't get that training otherwise. Many companies have similar programs to get customers that wouldn't otherwise buy their product, and many universities have similar programs to get students that wouldn't otherwise sign up to their courses.

    159. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Fuck you and your slave labor, silverspoon bigot. An internship IS employment and every person who works for a living knows it.

    160. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by JasperNuyens · · Score: 1

      Being nice to non-minority people is also covered in the Code of conduct, yes. And accepting collaboration from groups funding extra back or gay hands doesn't mean that your not nice to white people. Except from a very strange linguistic interpretation, the only reason I see why someone could be against it, is from a view of 'white supremacy'. Hope that in this case it's the first reason; compiler people might focus too much on the syntax part ;)

    161. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by JasperNuyens · · Score: 1

      Well the suppressed need defense. Otherwise you say any kind of 'defense' is bad. Are you blind to see what problems are caused by racism and sexism in the world? White supremacists who claim to be discriminated against? Oh, the irony! As soon as at least 35% of the US senators and top 100 of richest people in the world are black or women, you can start bitching. But until that time, shut the fuck up or act against racism and sexism! The only place in the world where there's active and effective discrimination against white people is in South Africa. And still it has very little impact on the economical injustice. Critisism on how things are dealt with in South Africa might be justified, I believe they are still seeking how to best handle stuff. But not in the US nor any other part of the world!

    162. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      You're welcome.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    163. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      The only "white supremacists" exist in your feverish, bigoted imagination. Now take your racial discrimination, shove it up your ass, and run home to daddy's mansion.

    164. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Many people do not deserve respect.

      I believe that everyone deserves respect

      Make up your minds, people :)

      But seriously, this is why I treat everyone with a respectful attitude until proven otherwise. I cannot judge people I do not know, and only when I know them I know whether they deserve my respect and admiration, or whether I should just ignore them because most of what they say is nonsense. Most people I meet deserve respect, some assholes do not.

      To clarify: people that bully others, try to hide incompetence by lashing out at others, intimidate and harass those weaker than them... lose my respect rapidly. There are few other things that piss me off as well, but these things are a zero-respect fast track for me.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    165. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I would suggest future open source projects begin entrenching an Anti-SJW code

      CODE OF CONDUCT

      1. Act like civilized adults, obey applicable laws, and only flame newbies when deserved.

      2. Any change to this code of conduct or establishing additional "Behavior codes" of any nature requires a 45 day discussion period, and a review of proposed changes by the core developers, and unanimous written consent of all core developers and active contributors.

    166. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      People who oppose anti-democratic petty authoritarianism must be forced out of the Free Software community! Fuck those guys and their love of freedom!

    167. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I don't know whether it's funy or trajic that you've literally converged on the same code of concdut as the "SJWs" you so fear, except that because you hate and fear the "SJW" you're determined to make all the same mistakes again.

      1. Act like civilized adults,

      That's what we used to say except it turns out that everyone has their own ideas about what "civilised adults" are so it has to be spelled out more clearly.

      2. Any change to this code of conduct or establishing additional "Behavior codes" of any nature requires a 45 day discussion period, and a review of proposed changes by the core developers, and unanimous written consent of all core developers and active contributors.

      You've just doomed your mailing list to endless flamey discussions as to whether a particular bit of behaviour is "civilised" or indeed "adult". I'm sure that's a great improvement!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    168. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Except, thing is broham, it's you "social justice" bigots who are renowned for creating hostile communities. But hey, don't let ugly truth spoil your lynch mob party.

    169. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      As a starting point, you should treat everyone with equal respect and potential, but if they prove themselves to not live up to that, go ahead and respect them less.

      For example Trump. If you didn't know him or hadn't heard about him before, he's just another old white dude in a suit. It's only when he opens his mouth you realize he is unworthy of respect.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    170. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Communists are objectively evil.

      I know! They put fluoride in ice cream CHILDREN's icecream.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    171. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The concept of "respect" is much different in the younger generations.

      Oh yes, I forgot, you're one of those notcases who just hates millenials because the only way for you to be actually better than anyone is to look down on someone due to an arbitrary characteristic.

      It used to be that you earned respect through your actions and abilities. Now young people think that "respect" is a right, no matter what.

      Oh yes that's why the kids invented the phrase "respect your elders".

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    172. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      P.S. What does "it is mission" mean?

      i think your being pedantic

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    173. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      #PetulantBigotedSJW

    174. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Keep on pretending you don't understand. We're all fooled.

    175. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      As long as he/she keeps it separate from their contributions, no they have not violated the CoC. The question asked at the hypothetical conference was about politics and just happened to be asked at a conference, but it didn't have anything to do with LLVM. The connection in that case would be purely incidental.

      Ideally, the developer in question would say "I don't want to talk about politics here, it's not the right venue for that. Let's talk about LLVM instead".

      In other words, no it is not a goddamn attack on certain political positions. It's a guard against bringing non-relevant politics into a software project.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    176. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      To expand, Rafael decided to drama queen out of the project because he thinks the CoC of being welcoming to all, not attacking people based on gender/religion/politics and to focus on the code is against his politics of being able to be a racist sexist shitbag.

      Good riddance.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    177. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      If "awesome" means it

      Awesome means it's awesome! Is that difficult to understand? You know, "really good" etc.

      Perhaps there's a specific example of my awesomeness you'd like me to reread or perhaps you feel that (in the words of the Reverend Lovejoy about the bible) "it's all good".

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    178. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Since when do white men treat each other with respect?

    179. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      I think you've missed a good part of my point...

      you've demanded you be allowed to ascribe intent (that their mistake is through being "lazy") while demanding they should not ascribe intent (belittling) to your ill-chosen words

      I don't have to judge what's a stupid failure or not. In my team, pretty much every process is documented. The documentation is available to everyone. There simply is no good excuse to not be following the documented processes.

      To be clear, I don't care (and thus don't "ascribe intent") whether someone is actually lazy, inattentive, arrogant, overconfident, or any of the myriad other reasons that would cause someone to screw up a documented process... If you're doing it wrong, then you're doing it wrong, and the reason doesn't matter, and doesn't even need to be discussed.

      you've started to label people's races as "insecurities"

      No, I said that they can pick an insecurity and claim prejudice against it.

      Let's run with an example. The perspective I'm arguing for will be played by "Alice", and the arbitrary teammate will be "Bob". Alice and Bob work on robots. They're big robots, of the kind that will injure and/or kill someone in a few seconds if something bad happens, which is why the processes say that loose clothing is prohibited while working in the robot area. Bob wears a suit and tie to work, goes into the robot area, and Alice notices.

      At this point, our hypothetical situation diverges. Under a restrictive conduct policy, Alice has to stop and consider how Bob might be offended if she were to intervene. He's a professional, and must be assumed to be fully competent, regardless of the obvious danger to himself and others that he's caused. Even hitting the e-stop and trying to politely explain the security hazard might be perceived as being condescending, so from the perspective of the conduct policy, the safest option is to let Bob continue to work as he pleases, until a suitably-nice reminder can be sent to the team reminding everyone to follow the safety procedures. Alice can then hope that Bob will be suitably inspired to go read the procedures, and catch the one particular rule that he wasn't following, and learn from his mistake enough to not repeat it.

      That's clearly not a good choice. Bob's still in danger, and the opportunity to effectively correct his mistake is lost.

      Let's suppose Alice does hit the e-stop, and tells Bob (in reasonably polite terms) that his necktie is essentially a well-behaved noose. Unfortunately, and completely unbeknownst to Alice, Bob is a big fan of fancy clothes. He happens to be rather short-statured, and feels that wearing a suit and tie helps make him appear to be a stronger leader. To Bob, any problem with his attire is just an attack against his height. Bob then goes to the HR and complains about discrimination.

      Now, we don't have to assume good faith on Bob's part. He may, for whatever reason, hate Alice intensely, and be looking for a way to get her in trouble. Following much the same logic as above, but without the genuine offense, Bob can go to HR and complain about Alice's supposed discrimination. The result is the same: Either way, Alice is now facing a discrimination complaint, and Bob has dismissed Alice's warnings, not realizing he was actually putting his own life at risk.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    180. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      All political cults do this, and I hate it:

      Going all sad-eyed about "we only want apple pie and motherhood! How can anyone be against that? I don't understand it!"

      The most common culprit is the side which you're defending now. But I also see conservative types doing the same ("How can anyone be against meritocracy? How can you even be against merit?" - literally saw that one on twitter), and I wouldn't be surprised if stormfront-nazi types do it too ("We only want our children to survive! How can anyone be against their children surviving?").

      In all cases, those unquestionably good things you can't comprehend anyone being against come with a side dish of questionable (at best) political assumptions.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    181. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Next time you apply for a job, try changing your CV to say "Mohammed". Every time this is tested, the results are the same.

      Unfortunately, it still matters. It's very hard to prove individual cases though, so the law isn't all that effective.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    182. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      +1 funny

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    183. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks Bruce, it's appreciated by many of us.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    184. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Dumbass, you selectively quoted the conduct. It says explicitly that complains by certain groups selected broadly by their gender, race and sexuality won't be considered

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    185. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

      Easy.

      I would just ask "Was he a white male"?

    186. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

      You don't need to be passive-aggressive on /., you can behave like a man if you want.

    187. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      I wasn't presenting an argument. I was calling you out for being a disingenuous shitstain.

      Fair enough, in such case -- as you don't contribute to diversity of discussion, merely insult people -- I don't wish to hear what you say any longer. Judging from your posting history, that's long overdue.

      Alas, Slashdot doesn't implement an ignore list; as I use the "Foes" feature to mark kooks (as crap-posters tend to do it AC), I'll have to do so by hand. Please forgive me if I ever forget and reply to you anyway.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    188. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by XXongo · · Score: 1

      Maybe it says that somewhere else. I was discussing the Community Code of Conduct, which is on a page labelled Community Code of Conduct, with a url llvm.org/docs/CodeOfConduct.htm. The text you say it "says explicitly" does not appear on that page.

    189. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by strikethree · · Score: 1

      It would seem to make sense to exclude white males since they are not traditionally underrepresented in tech.

      And it would make sense to exclude GIRLS from the BOY Scouts... Let me know how that works out for you.

      This is not equality, this is overt racism/sexism. I understand and support the need for "inclusivity" but blatantly discriminating against white males because of historic injustices is only going to serve to create another round of hatred and divisiveness. But yeah, go ahead and victimize innocent young boys who had nothing to do with creation of any social injustices. That will surely make things fair.

      As a privileged white male who has been forced to pay for previous injustices already, I am at the point where I am almost ready to advocate for wholesale genocide of all non-white races and enslavement of all females... just to get people like YOU to shut the fuck up. Apparently, only privileged white males care about equality and we can and will get there... despite the fucked up attempts being championed by people as ignorant as you.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    190. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by strikethree · · Score: 1

      It used to be that you earned respect through your actions and abilities. Now young people think that "respect" is a right, no matter what.

      I think we need to categorize "respect" because there are two different interpretations of what the word actually means:

      Basic human respect: Not denigrated or dismissed merely because of "insert external quality here".

      Respect: Granted trust based on previous accomplishments.

      Everyone "deserves" (should be granted?) the first kind of respect, regardless of the type of shitstain that they are. Very few can EARN the second type of respect.

      The problem is that the two definitions of the word respect are being merged... likely on purpose.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    191. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      to the fact that you're interacting across a cultural divide

      So in an international project, cultural divides are between sexes or skin colors and not between, you know, *actual* cultures or nations? Now that is a fascinating concept.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    192. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by TheReaperD · · Score: 1

      Wow, you really missed the point of my post.

      *woosh* required

      --
      "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
    193. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Actually, the pictures I've seen have been primarily white, not Asian. That may be a statistical anomaly.

      There are forces discouraging women from tech fields that last beyond puberty. I've seen them on occasion. It's hardly a simple fact. There may be long-term advantages in getting Outreachy-suggested people into leadership roles, to provide role models.

      Your suggested explanations look like you were trying to be sexist, BTW. Keep that up and it will backfire on you sometime.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    194. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by TheReaperD · · Score: 1

      Wow I have never had a post with so many moderation changes (16! as of this writing). The replies I have been getting also vary a lot between those who feel they right to treat people differently on whatever criteria they see fit and those who feel people should be treated equally. I saw a lot of posts about how women and people of color don't deserve respect unless it is earned but, usually, I find these are, hypocritically, people who believe they deserve respect when they metaphorically walk in the door. Also more often than not, they'll give white males respect up front but, everyone else must earn it and, in what says the most about their character, is that they can't or won't see what the problem with that is.

      --
      "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
    195. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      I'm a white male and programs like "Outreachy" have no meaningful impact on my ability to contribute to open source projects or make a living in tech.

      Well, you're white, male, rich, and established. Take a young white straight male, unestablished in the field, from a low income household, with all the disadvantages you can think of, and your "Outreachy" program has just meaningfully impacted his ability to get started in tech open source projects. Now, would this be representative of most straight white males? Perhaps not. But for the individuals you *will* impact with this (and there always will be some), you're doing a grave injustice that they have no business being the victim of. Having a poor appalachian pay for the white privilege *you* enjoy simply isn't fair - which is why we tend to decry things like racism, where we judge people based on the color of their skin rather than their individual circumstances.

      Further, I don't see programs like Outreachy reversing the polarity of discrimination. All they are doing is making sure a few electrons flow in the other direction while the vast majority of electrons are still going the same direction they always have.

      You're giving away the game here. Using racial, sexual orientation, and gender discrimination to "make sure" a few things flow in a specific direction *is* discrimination. It might not be widespread, or overwhelming, but rape is rape. Just because it isn't part of some massive military rape program of the Hutus doesn't make it any less rapey.

      My assertion is this - there are ways of addressing both "damage" and potential discrimination without being explicitly discriminatory, even in small batches. Just like there are ways of addressing rape without just raping in the other direction. Rather than using the very tools and techniques we abhor when applied in the "wrong" direction, we should rise above the pain of the past and work towards an equitable future without becoming the enemies we fight.

    196. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      Cream rises to the top, but shit also floats.

      There are many ways to get ahead in business and politics. Merit is one of those ways, but it's strikingly rare. The circumstances of your birth seem to have a much greater impact than things like effort and competence.

    197. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      No one believes that but you.

    198. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you don't want to treat anyone with respect -- earned or not.

      See, the 'respect is earned' line in this context can be nothing other than a justification to treat those you consider outsiders poorly. It's just carte blanche for you to use abusive language and hateful rhetoric.

      There is no place in our modern world for that sort of antisocial behavior. Like it or not, the culture is changing. There are real social (and professional) consequences for abusive or hateful language and behaviors.

      You'll need to learn how to offer someone criticism without insulting or alluding to properties of their gender, race, creed, physical appearance, etc.

      It's not difficult. Just be polite. Don't act like an asshole. That's what this, and just about every other CoC, is saying in the broad strokes. Regardless of whatever legalistic twist you want to put on one specifically, you're going to be in the clear if you're just polite and don't act like an asshole.

    199. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by reanjr · · Score: 1

      "Nazism is just a method of social order. It is amoral, neither good nor evil."

      Yup, that's how your dumb-ass sounds.

    200. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      That's just empty rhetoric.

      Let's try a simple example. Let's say that the girls in the class were given one cookie while the boys were given two. That's not fair, as anyone can see. The solution is to simply give the girls an additional cookie.

      No one thinks that's discrimination. You won't hear someone cry "why didn't everyone get an additional cookie?".

      Something just as simple: Starting with a fact like "girls don't have as many opportunities as boys to get in to tech" the obvious solution is "create more opportunities for girls".

      Why is this suddenly "discrimination"? It's not. It just levels the playing field.

      You can call it discrimination, and defend that indefensible position against those who aren't as skilled linguistically, but it's still just empty rhetoric. Most people understand that.

    201. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Is Rafael suffering from burn-out. In a burn-out state, a person tends to lash out at items of lessor importance, particularly when the problem at hand is very very difficult to resolve.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    202. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      Exactly different in every respect, unless you are trying to say that the reason why women, non binary genders, and minorities are underrepresented in tech is because of their genetic, biological, and physical differences.

      Your analogy choice perfectly illustrated the opposite of what you are trying to say.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    203. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      To achieve equal opportunity, sometimes you need to make special accommodation. This is no more "morally bankrupt" than wheelchair ramps.

      Offering more opportunity to those who already have less opportunity just helps level playing field. That's not discrimination by any sensible definition. It's inclusive, not exclusive.

      It's like watching people complain about someone else getting a 10-second head-start in a foot race when they're already starting a mile down the path!

    204. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      I don't think that anyone has taken into consideration the most basic reason not to hire someone named Mohammed. There's already 10 guys here with the same first name, and any more will break the payroll system. They learned this from "The great "Chris" hiring freeze of 1992."

      Seriously though, I have met a ton of people (literally, the number is close to 2000) with the name Mohammed that have jobs. I do business with them. Most of them are physicians, petroleum engineers, IT gurus, business owners, and mathematicians. Most of them make well over 100k/year. Are you saying we need to help these people get better jobs than they already have because their name is Mohammed? Discrimination against their name means they are in the top 5%, rather than the top 4%?

      Or are you saying the name Mohammed gets you better jobs that pay more? That seems much more likely from what I have seen.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    205. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      There are tons of exceptions from parking and housing to grants and loans! For good reason, as you probably already know.

      There's a huge difference between "discrimination" that is inclusive vs discrimination that is exclusive. The poorly named "reverse discrimination" is necessary if we're to achieve equal opportunity. By not "discriminating" you can unfairly harm whole classes of people.

    206. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The tech industry doesn't have equal opportunity, but only because so many opportunities are denied to men or to white people.

      I still don't support discrimination to supposedly help them. Discrimination is bad, and you've just revealed your own immorality.

    207. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      I'm advocating for white people by making sure they have separate accommodations everywhere. A special place on the bus, a special water fountain right over there...

      Don't you get it? When you start to classify people by their innate characteristics and use those criteria to provide or deny access, you strut proudly into the ring of discrimination. That you feel justified in doing it, and defend it against any criticism, makes you a bigot.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    208. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      You have no idea why they are not accepting white straight males. Sure they state one thing, but what are their real motivations? As contrast, I bet you know exactly why any straight white male hiring manager rejects an application from a transsexual from Cameroon. Don't you? Yeah, you're a world class psychic when that happens.

      In both cases you really don't know a damn thing about the motivations involved. You have merely decided which one is always virtuous and which one is always evil.

      Instead of choosing a universal principle as virtuous, like equality, you have chosen to enshrine a political agenda as virtuous. You have replaced virtue with politics.

      This is why you react with verbal violence against someone advocating for true equality and egalitarianism. You have usurped true virtue with political thought. Your mind is tainted, and when you are forced to confront your own despicable falseness, you lash out at the principles and people that remind you of what you really are. A sellout and a hypocrite.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    209. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      That's ... not what the paradox of tolerance is ...

    210. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      First, those sorts of clauses are very common for jobs where you're a "public face". They're often called "morality clauses" and they're to protect the company should they need to remove someone who is damaging to their image.

      In this case, it's to justify the removal of someone who, through their actions outside the group, cause harm to the group.
       

    211. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      If he does, how about you explore and understand why he can't get one. (Hint: Racism is illegal, so that's almost certainly not the answer).

      Because once you've made something illegal, it stops happening.

      We should make rape and murder illegal as soon as possible.

      Drugs too. If we made it illegal to obtain opioids without a prescription, we'd put that crisis to a quick and decisive end.

    212. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      That's a twisted view. It's perfectly okay for there to be separate boy scouts and girl scouts. No one claims otherwise, except trolls who want to parody the position of those seeking a more egalitarian society.

      The BSA is changing because scouting is dying. Ask your local troop, if they still exist, how long they expect to last. They need to be more inclusive as they badly need more members. It has nothing to do with social justice or a "boys only" club somehow being immoral.

      Not that this is a massive change or anything. My wife was a Venture Scout and Order of the Arrow member. The didn't exactly have a sign out front that read 'no girls aloud' anyway.

      The Freemasons are still men-only. That's not likely to change in my lifetime. It's also not a problem.

      The Moose have separate Lodge (men) and Chapter (women) with their own separate governance and finances. It's also not a problem. A few years ago, it was proposed that lodge and chapter merge on the national level. The women were the ones that opposed it. We're all Moose in the social quarters.

      The local IHC used to only allow "full" Italians (whatever that means) to join. It wasn't a problem. They only stopped that practice because they needed more members.

      The K of C only allow Catholics to join. This is perfectly acceptable. It is, after all, a club for Catholics.

      See, it's okay to form a group around something the members have in common, such as their needs or values. That's why we form groups, after all.

      It's not "age discrimination" that keeps you from joining the local cub scout pack. That's a group for boys aged 8 to 10.5 who are interested in scouting. There are so many groups (Beavers, Cubs, Scouts, Explorers, Network) because the various age ranges have different needs. No one, not even the parody image you have of us egalitarians, thinks that this is a problem.

      The problem we see comes when your groups specifically excludes some group. For the IHC, it's fine if they only accept Italians but not fine if they accept everyone but blacks. There's a big difference between "Just for us" and "Not for you". It's a difficult distinction for some people, but one that apparently needs to be pointed out.

    213. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      That's perfectly insane.

    214. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by war4peace · · Score: 1

      There are tons of exceptions from parking and housing to grants and loans!

      Of course, and they're all law-abiding.
      The law, however, says "thou shalt not discriminate based on gender, religion, skin color, age" et caetera "when hiring". Sure, there are justified exceptions, such as not being able to obtain a horse jockey position if you weigh 250 pounds. This case doesn't fit any exception.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    215. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      The number of female CS graduates has been dropping since the 80s when I graduated. Why? Are the women of today genetically less capable of grasping code than the women of 30 years ago? Nonsense.

      Is it? While women haven't changed in 30 years, tech did. And on average, men and women score better on some cognitive tasks. For example, it seems that men are better at mental rotation while women tend to be better at calculations. And early computers were actually people, usually women, doing calculations by hand.
      Today, coding is much more abstract, it is more about managing large, complex structure than fiddling with instructions and addresses.

      I am not saying that genetics is the reason why there are so few women coders but it shouldn't be dismissed as nonsense without proper study.

    216. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      They're not hiring, so ... there you go.

      There's absolutely nothing illegal about this.

    217. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by war4peace · · Score: 1

      They're not hiring anymore, due to backlash.
      There's nothing illegal about this anymore.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    218. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by narcc · · Score: 1

      LLVM is not participating in the program at this time, though I doubt it's due to any imagined 'backlash'. This is pretty much not news anywhere. There's the post here and a short story on The Register. The phoronix.com article linked in the summary doesn't even come up in a simple search. Even the "I am leaving" on the llvm subreddit only managed 4 comments. The only people complaining are on Slashdot, home of the perpetually unhappy.

      Outreachy is still operating as usual. They've just selected interns for May-August Again, still perfectly legal. If you believe their activities are unlawful, you should notify the proper authorities. I doubt that they'll do anything, however, as they're not doing anything illegal.

    219. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Go fuck yourself, bigot.

    220. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      A competent HR department...

      I'm going to guess you've never actually had to report process violations... There's lots of nice words thrown around in training, like "no retaliation", "anonymous reporting", and "immediate stop-work", but the reality that often happens is that the stop-work call is overridden by a senior manager who has a deadline to meet, the anonymity falls away when HR is in an office with a big window at the end of the hall, and if the person you called out has just enough brain cells to realize that the HR processes will take time, they can use it against you.

      Never assume that HR will function the way they're supposed to. After all, they are generally there to protect the company, not the employees, and a harassment lawsuit is much scarier than a mere process violation.

      But I digress...

      ...would ask Bob what Alice said SPECIFICALLY.

      When an HR department asks (a week after the fact), Bob simply has to lie and say "I don't remember", and "she's always second-guessing me because I'm short". Then HR stops caring about the safety violation, and starts looking at the harassment (after another week), instead. If Alice tries to explain (three weeks in) that there was actually a violation, Bob can simply deny it (a month after it happened), and it looks like Alice is trying to hide her own discrimination.

      Sure, eventually the truth might come out if anybody remembers it for that long, but by then it's been two months of time where work keeps pushing forward, without any change to ensure Bob is actually following processes.

      He would say, "Alice told me my tie was a safety violation because I was in the robot area." HR would the ask Bob if he was actually wearing a tie in the robot area. Bob would answer "Yes"

      Again, in relation to the "insecurity" comment I made earlier, Bob does not necessarily have to intend to lie. You're assuming that Bob is cognizant of his own error after being told. After a few days of justifying his actions to himself, he could tell HR "Alice was yelling at me for being in the robot area, but that's where I was supposed to be working. She's always second-guessing me because I'm short." HR never asks him about wearing a tie, because Bob never mentions it - to him, it's just a normal part of his attire. The scenario then plays out as above, but Bob is a completely-innocent victim in his mind. Again, he has no reason to change, because his mistake was never the focus of any discussion.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    221. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Sounds like there were more examples showing discrimination of certain religions and politics, but he only mentioned the outreachy example.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    222. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by Marisaze · · Score: 1

      It also often requires long hours (often over weekends and holidays), poor job security (the best paying work is contract, and you're in constant competition to do it for the lowest cost), poor benefits (as contract work the company has no requirement to offer any services), and the taxes are hell to do (and worse to pay).

      Men trend toward high pay above all else, including their own safety and sanity. Women trend toward job safety and benefits. If you assume the bell curve, it makes sense that there'd be no more than 25% of women that go outside the general trend. I don't think it's entirely a coincidence that women only have about 25% representation in tech vs population. If anything, this could be pointing to an already inflated number of women in tech, as it implies that all the outlier women go into tech as opposed to another risk sensitive endeavor like opening a business

      You could make the work more appealing to average women, but then you're not going to be seeing the large income figures because it's going toward the other benefits. It would be great to see more women in tech, but until the job changes I doubt it will happen, and by the time the job changes the wages will reflect the new normal.

    223. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      SJW useful idiots are making people consider discrimination by talking about it so much. The goal is to create animosoty and outline in detail the behavior that is unacceptable so it is easier for people to follow those patterns. This feeds back on itself and creates the behavior. The last thing the real antogonists want are people to get along with eachother.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    224. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Getting dressed down is a normal part of working in engineering/IT. The last thing anybody is going to stand for is being treated equally. It isnt easy on the feals. When people cant treat you the way the group is used to functioning you are not going to go anywhere. Changing the group is never good for business.

      I have heard people exclaim that they were surprised at how well a new female engineer was working out since they were a girl and all....but they were granted status based on thier merit despite the overall preconceived notion that they would not be as strong technically. However this female was adept at navigating a male environment.

      Then again, I have met a few women who could not handle all the drama that was always flying in a female dominated environment. One woman I knew transferred to IT, (and endured the boss barking at her for coffee) to get away from the women in another department. Crazy.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    225. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      SJW is a beautiful manifestation of communisms' useful idiots. The aim is to destroy society so another can replace it....so dont expext rational discourse.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    226. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      You don't think requiring someone to be "considerate" is a bit much? Who is going to be the arbiter of that? Subjective social things like that should not be requirements to attend a conference. Or to participate in an internship program. Or a free software project.

    227. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      And now we reach the real reason for this discrimination you're participating in - so that you can feel good about it.

    228. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      Yup, truth continues.

    229. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      And by the way, how do you know who needs a lift up, anyway? Do you go into their entire family history, whether or not they have alcoholic parents, or were adopted, or were bullied in school, or maybe have one leg shorter than the other, or do you just go by skin color and discriminate on that basis? Most people call that racism, but you think it makes you some sort of saint. It doesn't.

    230. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      So your basing your position on 'pictures'? Please try harder, that's just pitiful

      I have yet to hear a reasonable, non-sexist, explanation for why girls math scores go to _shit_ right about puberty. Perhaps sexism is correct?

      That variation is enough, by itself, to explain why women are underrepresented in tech. Tits (especially nice ones) give girls unearned power, just when they _should_ be applying themselves academically. Unfortunately, that power has a short expiration date. If they realize what happened, it's too late to switch back to a tough subject.

      If my supposition is correct, nice tits will correlate with not working in tech (Moobs aren't 'nice', by definition BTW). Which has been my experience.

      You gotta admit, women in tech are as 'unfortunate looking' as men in tech.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    231. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Someone has quoted this in another comment, presumably from the CoC in question:

      Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding:
      ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’
      Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”
      Refusal to explain or debate social justice concepts
      Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial
      Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions

      This does sound overly broad. For example, under these rules, it would appear that one of the "penetration is always rape" radfems could tell a cis white male that they're a rapist (which is a valid accusation if you subscribe to these notions) - and the latter would have no recourse, because it would be "reverse sexism", no complaints accepted. In fact, they would even be unable to ask why they're so accused, since that would involve "explaining or debating social justice concepts". You could argue that this isn't an example of such - but those people would sincerely disagree, and who decides what is a valid social justice concern, and what isn't?

    232. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Nevertheless, someone got fired for snickering about "dongle". The woman being fired didn't re-employ him.

      True but that was his company's decision. They could have chosen to simply go with an apology which the employee himself did or they could have called her out as a hypocrite for a Twitter post she made while at that very same conference

      https://twitter.com/adriaricha...

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    233. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, they could have. There are many places where someone could have said STOP! But everyone was afraid to push back and simply call for reasonability. That's part of the problem with the attitude that surrounds the sorts of efforts that lead to a formal code of conduct. Like many moral panics, the point is quickly reached where you're either with the lynch mob or you're guilty and need lynching.The employer needed to signal that they were against sexual harassment and the questionability of the complaint was lost behind "HE VIOLATED THE CODE OF CONDUCT".

      The various codes of conduct themselves seem harmless enough, but they tend to act like a nucleus or the "harmless" pebble rolling down the snow bank.

    234. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In my experience, women working in tech are overall pretty good-looking, often with nice boobs.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    235. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      Someone has quoted this in another comment, presumably from the CoC in question: "Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people's safety over privileged people's comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: ..."

      No, that's not from the CoC in question (it's from the github CoC).

      I don't know why someone would even bring that up in relation to Rafael/LLVM. It can't be a slippery slope argument because LLVM clearly decided *against* those terms in a CoC.

    236. Re:Meet minimum standards of human behavior by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Thank you for clarifying. Then I don't get what his problems with accepting their CoC really are (and he claims that it's the crux of the problem, not Outreachy).

    237. Re: Meet minimum standards of human behavior by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      That "respectful treatment" you refer to is commonly called "courtesy". Everyone deserves courtesy, but only those who earn it deserve respect.

  12. Re:How horrable! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    His objections are more like objecting to discriminating on the basis of race, gender, and sexual preference. That was the last straw for him Do you support that?
    I don't.

    Some people support this only when it discriminates against the people they think should get an advantage. There's different ways to justify this. Everyone mostly agrees that basing discrimination on hate and prejudice is wrong. Other people think basing discrimination on an aggregate unfairness of baked in identity is OK. I and many others think discrimination is just across the board wrong. Some people don't want to be part of groups that advocate this form if discrimination.

    To give you an example, a white, poor kid wouldn't be eligible for the Outreachy program. But a rich black kid would. How is that fair?

  13. Code Vs Emotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I get it, and I agree with him. If I were the main creator of something, and suddenly instead of being all about code, working out logic facts and figures everything started to be about how people 'feel' then I'd get the hell away from that hot mess too.

    We are looking to create, not to socialize. Placing socializing as a top priority on a logic problem over getting work done is insane.

    The other thing is, we do not all want to be nice all the time. If I am just a volunteer contributor then I should be able to be racist, mysoginistic, all inclusive, homosexual, heterosexual, pansexual or any shade of human you prefer. What these directives are doing is attempting to tell us all how to think feel and act which has nothing to do with coding logic or creating. They want us to be someone we are not to fit a narrative of reality which we do not even really know is good or bad in the long run, we just know it's popular think at this moment in time.

    At any rate, you can all demonize him all you like but the man volunteered for 12 solid years, did an amazing job and has decided to leave causing a gaping hole and potentially the death of the entire project. If they were looking to help the projects then they have failed by alienating the developers.

    1. Re:Code Vs Emotion by XXongo · · Score: 1

      I get it, and I agree with him. If I were the main creator of something, and suddenly instead of being all about code, working out logic facts and figures everything started to be about how people 'feel' then I'd get the hell away from that hot mess too.

      Yes, I agree. A code of conduct that says you should be nice to people?! What is the world coming to? Everybody knows that the best programmers are assholes and enjoy being assholes, right? And that makes better code: when you drive out the people who can't take being insulted and belittled, only the strong survive, and are better programmers for it.

    2. Re:Code Vs Emotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We should have freedom of speech and thought. They attempted to tell him how to think feel and act and he told them to kiss his ass. I would make the same choice. Nobody tells me who I am going to be except myself, I'm not the SJW's frigging monkey.

    3. Re:Code Vs Emotion by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      " And that makes better code"

      Maybe it does produce better code. How do you know it doesn't?

    4. Re:Code Vs Emotion by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      If you are looking to create, and can only create alone because respecting other folks is inimical to you, that's your problem. If you object to an organization that was out to encourage participation by women and minorities insisting that funded candidates actually be women or minorities, that is also your problem. In that case, yeah, you can only create alone now because reasonable people aren't going to put up with you any longer. Maybe you need a long walk and some thinking about your own attitude.

    5. Re:Code Vs Emotion by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      If I am just a volunteer contributor then I should be able to be racist, mysoginistic, all inclusive, homosexual, heterosexual, pansexual or any shade of human you prefer.

      No, in the LLVM community (or any community), you should not be racist, mysoginistic, etc. to your peers. It is cancer to any group effort. But no one should be attacking you for your beliefs if you are not even expressing them in a public forum (this is what is colloquially referred to as "witchhunt").

      and has decided to leave causing a gaping hole and potentially the death of the entire project.

      Losing the 5th most active contributor will definitely leave a gaping hole, but I seriously doubt it will lead to the death of the LLVM project. Your hyperbole is just as stupid and SJW witchhunts.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    6. Re:Code Vs Emotion by gweihir · · Score: 1

      At any rate, you can all demonize him all you like but the man volunteered for 12 solid years, did an amazing job and has decided to leave causing a gaping hole and potentially the death of the entire project. If they were looking to help the projects then they have failed by alienating the developers.

      A typical effect when the SJW poison leaks in. Another is that the standards gets lowered massively (because you cannot really criticize anyone anymore or reject their bad "contributions") and even people that would have had the talent to contribute good code fail to learn and improve because they do not get challenged anymore. Nothing kills a technologically demanding project more reliably.

      It is time for new FOSS projects to have a CoC that categorically states that "There will not be a CoC besides this one and this one will not be changed." and nothing else. Unless the FOSS learns to spot the hostile SJW invaders and fights them off early, valuable projects will continue to get destroyed to nobodies benefit.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Code Vs Emotion by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Losing the 5th most active contributor will definitely leave a gaping hole, but I seriously doubt it will lead to the death of the LLVM project. Your hyperbole is just as stupid and SJW witchhunts.

      Let me add to that in kind: Your capability for insight is too small so see that this is of course not the only damage done to the project by this attack. If it were just this person leaving and everybody else was continuing to be happy and productive, the project would survive. But that is most certainly not the case. Id a long-term contributor takes a step this drastic, things are _bad_.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:Code Vs Emotion by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Yes, I agree. A code of conduct that says you should be nice to people?! What is the world coming to? Everybody knows that the best programmers are assholes and enjoy being assholes, right? And that makes better code: when you drive out the people who can't take being insulted and belittled, only the strong survive, and are better programmers for it.

      Indeed, didn't we all learn that from the BOFH? If you can't torture everyone else, why even bother?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    9. Re:Code Vs Emotion by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Yes, I agree. A code of conduct that says you should be nice to people?!

      He isn't objecting to a code of conduct that only says be nice to people; it says other things too. That you have to imply that he is only against that part of the CoC says a lot about your argument.

      If the only way you can think of in this argument is to shame egalitarians, then perhaps you are not on the correct moral and/or ethical side of the argument.

      BTW: the shaming language was ocerused and now it has no effect. Mindlessly equivocating and straw-manning doesn't work so good no more, does it? What are you going to do? Double down the stupid?

      Remember, it is possible for people to be against affirmative action while being for equality. Because affirmative action and equality a orthogonal. You can have one or the other, you can't have both.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    10. Re:Code Vs Emotion by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      If you are looking to create, and can only create alone because respecting other folks is inimical to you, that's your problem.

      You are mischaracterising his position. Is your argument so weak that you need to outright lie to make your point? He didn't say he doesn't want to respect other people, he said he doesn't want to be associated with discrimination.

      Affirmative action and equality are orthogonal - you can only implement affirmative action by introducing a handicap. You can only have equality by removing all handicaps. You can't have both, you moron.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    11. Re:Code Vs Emotion by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Absolutely this. He might be some sort of rockstar but he contributed only 2.7% of the total changes. In other words his contributions are dwarfd by the team. so, from a purely technical point of view if he can't work without driving people in the team away, then the downsides of having him on board outweigh the benefits.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    12. Re:Code Vs Emotion by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If a long-term contributor leaves for whatever reason, that's not good evidence of a general problem. There could be any number of reasons behind it, and the stated reasons are not always the true reasons. If more long-term contributors leave and cite the same things, that is good evidence of a serious problem, but we haven't seen that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  14. One [Re:LLVM code of conduct] by XXongo · · Score: 1

    ...Oh, and they're participating in an outreach program to encourage under-represented demographics to participate in open source project. I guess that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

    Yes... an outreach program that was planning to hire one (1) intern from an underrepresented population.

    One.

  15. WTF is LLVM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I know the "editors" are really dead spider husks in old cobwebs, but explaining abbreviations in a summary is one of the basic things they should be doing.

    1. Re:WTF is LLVM? by Holi · · Score: 1

      LLVM is not an abbreviation, it is the name.

      The very first paragraph on LLVM.org:
      The LLVM Project is a collection of modular and reusable compiler and toolchain technologies. Despite its name, LLVM has little to do with traditional virtual machines. The name "LLVM" itself is not an acronym; it is the full name of the project.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:WTF is LLVM? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      You are not wrong, but you aren't entirely correct either.

      Originally, LLVM stood for Low Level Virtual Machine

      PROOF: click!, (Illinois Computer Science magazine), 2013, Volume II, Page 13

      That prototype included a lot of the key design
      elements of what would become LLVM, says Adve.
      LLVM originally stood for "low level virtual machine,"
      but as LLVM has expanded its capabilities it has left
      that acryonym behind and is known only by its initials

      Anyone who has worked in compilers knows that the "front-end" translates the programming language into a AST (Abstract Syntax Tree), whilst the "back-end" translates the AST into assembly language. LLVM "abstracted" the assembly language into two parts:

      The two pieces of the LLVM code generator are the high-level interface to the code generator and the set of reusable components that can be used to build target-specific backends.

  16. Re:How horrable! by 605dave · · Score: 2

    Isn't that one of the highest forms of posting?

    --
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
  17. Re:How horrable! by Altus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't like the code, comment on the PR, point out problems and weak points... but if you have to resort to anything that would violate those community standards in order to it then your points probably aren't that valid and perhaps you are not the great coder you believe yourself to be.

    --

    "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

  18. Re:Important Questions by jcr · · Score: 2

    If you've never heard of LLVM, and lack the skills to find out what it is on your own, then slashdot is probably not the place for you.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  19. Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by sbrown123 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They actually have this in their CoC:

    "Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. "

    They follow by saying they condone "reversism's". In other words if you are white male or female you can be openly harassed within the community because you are considered privileged. What the hell has happened to these projects?!

    1. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by deesine · · Score: 2

      Marginalized. Every time, I can't help but imagine someone smeared in butter stuff.

      --
      damaged by dogma
    2. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      prioritizes marginalized peopleâ(TM)s safety over privileged peopleâ(TM)s comfort

      That's a great policy and it's not what you're twisting it into. Safety should be the priority. That's like complaining that seat belts shouldn't be prioritized over most people's convenience. We shouldn't have passwords! After all, why should we prioritize the user's safety over the user's convenience and comfort?

    3. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by tbannist · · Score: 1

      They actually have this in their CoC:

      "Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. "

      That's funny. I can't seem to find that quote in the Code of Conduct.

      They follow by saying they condone "reversism's". In other words if you are white male or female you can be openly harassed within the community because you are considered privileged. What the hell has happened to these projects?!

      Again, I don't see that in the actual Code of Conduct.

      However, I was able to find those words in a template Code of Conduct posted by the TODO Group. Did you somehow end up reading the wrong code of conduct?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    4. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Marginalized. Every time, I can't help but imagine someone smeared in butter stuff.

      I picture someone with one of their variables integrated out. Probably a quite painful procedure.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      I noticed that too.

      Maybe if llvm had added this, they could have avoided the SJW scare:

      Our open source community prioritizes truthful communication over people’s comfort.
      We will act on complaints regarding:

      * ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’;
      * Unreasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”, when open communication is required;
      * Refusal to explain or debate asserted concepts
      * Communicating in a ‘tone’ you don’t find congenial
      * Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or other behaviors or assumptions

    6. Re:Ubuntu and Python CoC is about as bad by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Margerinalized? Pasturized?

      --
      I tend to rant.
  20. Makes sense to me by WaffleMonster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that
    openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes
    directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project
    to not be associated with this.

    [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai...
    [2] https://www.outreachy.org/appl...

    What if the group was "white straight dudes under 30 only" would giving money to this group still be ok?

    It's rather rich to preach tolerance of other tribes and at the same time actively promote and give money to clubs whose only requirement for belonging is tribal purity.

    I don't see how it is possible to preach tolerance while actively supporting and funding tribalism while not becoming a hypocrite in the process.

    If you want more diversity or whatever there are ways to get there that don't involve nurturing tribalism.

    1. Re:Makes sense to me by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are there any real outreach organizations for white straight dudes 30-s only?

      And you're the reason Outreachy is needed. Right now minorities are severely disadvantaged - they are less likely to get a good education, less likely to have access to computers when young, less likely to have a supportive social environment and so on. These disadvantages are real. They're there. They are inarguable.

      If you know a way to compensate for them, so that a Latino kid with immigrant parents living in a ghetto neighborhood in Detroit would have equal opportunities with a white male from San Francisco then I would like to hear it.

    2. Re:Makes sense to me by paulpach · · Score: 1

      What if the group was "white straight dudes under 30 only" would giving money to this group still be ok?

      You are putting words in his mouth and then attacking him for it. I don't know why you assume he would be ok with "white straight dudes under 30 only". From his statement (that you quoted), I would assume he would be opposed to that as sell.

      I don't see how it is possible to preach tolerance while actively supporting and funding tribalism while not becoming a hypocrite in the process.

      He is not actively supporting anything. He simply stopped developing LLVM, he is not rioting, doing a hunger strike or even demanding any changes from anyone.

      "funding tribalism" what on earth are you talking about?

    3. Re:Makes sense to me by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      You are putting words in his mouth and then attacking him for it. I don't know why you assume he would be ok with "white straight dudes under 30 only". From his statement (that you quoted), I would assume he would be opposed to that as sell.

      You are confused. My message supports the premise of Rafael's that discriminatory clubs are ethical problems by offering an analogy pointing out how absurd discriminatory clubs are.

      He is not actively supporting anything. He simply stopped developing LLVM, he is not rioting, doing a hunger strike or even demanding any changes from anyone.

      LLVM an organization Rafael was very much a part of was giving thousands of dollars to a group that is against Rafael's "ethical views". This is why he left. He stated this explicitly. He didn't want to be a party to it.

      "funding tribalism" what on earth are you talking about?

      Read Rafael's message to the list and follow the links he offers and you will find out.

    4. Re:Makes sense to me by paulpach · · Score: 1

      Ohhh, ok, it makes more sense now :)

    5. Re:Makes sense to me by strikethree · · Score: 1

      If you know a way to compensate for them, so that a Latino kid with immigrant parents living in a ghetto neighborhood in Detroit would have equal opportunities with a white male from San Francisco then I would like to hear it.

      The only difference in opportunity is economic in nature. Buy the Latino kid a computer and Internet access and that kid will have an equal opportunity. Oh wait, I am a white male who grew up poor and nobody bought me a fucking computer and Internet connection... and yet here I am.

      Nobody paid for my college... because I never had the opportunity to go! Nobody encouraged me to get into computing, as a matter of fact, the only reason I could get into computing is because I REALLY wanted it and scraped by for MONTHS to pay $60 for a compiler (DICE Dillons Integrated C Environment) to use on my refurbished Commodore Amiga 500.

      Fuck this SJW shit. Outreachy can burn in hell as can ALL who discriminate... ESPECIALLY those who discriminate in the name of justice. Go ahead and tear down society. I can't wait to see how the society you are creating works (or actually doesn't, because nobody can be held responsible because of their feelings).

      You are letting people manipulate your heart which is manipulating your brain. Get out of the pot smoke and see reality. It is brutal and unforgiving. This SJW bullshit is only making it worse. The piper must be paid.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    6. Re:Makes sense to me by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      If you want to compete with me who had to go further uphill both ways in snow you're going to lose. I lived in a house without running water and I had to go to school uphill (one way) through actual snow, even when I was in the first grade. Yet I had a good social environment - my parents are well educated and my peers were interested in solving International Math Olympiad problems rather than engaging in gang violence.

      So yes, please shut the fuck up if you have no idea what you're talking about. You white snowflakes think that "not having a computer as a kid" entitles you to know everything about disadvantages other people experience.

    7. Re:Makes sense to me by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      If you know a way to compensate for them, so that a Latino kid with immigrant parents living in a ghetto neighborhood in Detroit would have equal opportunities with a white male from San Francisco then I would like to hear it.

      We don't need to find a way to compensate for the poor losers in the world. It is their job to figure a way out of their problems. Nobody every said the world was equal and fair to all. And if you think keeping certain colors of people out makes things more fair, that is quite illuminating.

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  21. not surprised by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

    I'm not surprised that this stuff turns some people off and causes them to say "fine, enough is enough. I was here for the code."

    Most free software projects, nobody ever even sees you. If they don't seem to like your contributions, it's probably not because they are big wacist toxic masculine meanie weenies.

    1. Re:not surprised by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      It opens up the time honored leftist tactic of squealing "I am from 'marginalized' group, you criticized me for something unrelated to that 'marginalization' therefore your argument is invalid."

      Now why would anyone be against that?

    2. Re:not surprised by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There is communication among developers in F/OSS projects, just not (typically) face-to-face meetings. If one person is obnoxious to certain groups, people of those groups are likely to be less enthusiastic about the project, and the project suffers.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    3. Re:not surprised by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      There is communication among developers in F/OSS projects, just not (typically) face-to-face meetings. If one person is obnoxious to certain groups, people of those groups are likely to be less enthusiastic about the project, and the project suffers.

      Indeed. That appears to be why he left.

      Oh, you meant something else?

    4. Re:not surprised by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The Code of Conduct looks innocuous enough in language. He seems to have left primarily because he didn't want anything challenging white male privilege, but maybe I've become a touch too cynical in my old age. (I had to become a lot more cynical after Trump's election, and I may have overshot.).

      The example I'm thinking of (Erik Naggum in comp.lang.lisp) is way old, but obnoxious people do discourage others. It's something every development group should be prepared to deal with.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  22. Re:Sounds good to me by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Moobs?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  23. Re: Where's the beef? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Jesus was too nice and weak.

    Matthew 10:34 would like to have a word with you.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  24. Re:Bullying 2.0: Act like you are the victim, use by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

    If he had just left without saying anything, people would be made uncomfortable, which the CoC does not allow.

  25. Re: Where's the beef? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

    Actually...it is well documented that Jesus was a terrorist. He was hanging with the Iscari and has several revolutionary quotes in the Bible. The fucking pharisees and other assholes were cooperating with the Romans in the hope they could banish his bloodline and assume power granted by the Romans. Not the traditional terrorist that we think of but the Romans branded him as such. By some strange twist of events and history he was canonized and his story was overlaid with an ancient Egyptian Son story.

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  26. Yeah, this is what he's talking about. by davide+marney · · Score: 5, Informative

    From https://www.outreachy.org/appl...

    "Outreachy Eligibility Rules

    You must meet one of the following criteria:

    You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).

    You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander"

    So, there you go. If your skin color isn't acceptable, no internship for you.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:Yeah, this is what he's talking about. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many people do you have to kill to be a murderer?

      How many things do you have to steal to be a thief?

      How many people do you have to hire with discriminatory criteria to be a bigoted organization?

    2. Re:Yeah, this is what he's talking about. by thomst · · Score: 1

      https://slashdot.org/~davide+marney quoted Outreachy's membership qualifications statement thusly:

      Outreachy Eligibility Rules>/p>

      You must meet one of the following criteria:

      You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).

      You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander

      Prompting XXongo to respond:

      And you're aware that they were awarding one internship with this, right?

      That's what set him off. One internship.

      From previous posts, I gather that a paid internship position is at the heart of Mr. Espindola's objection to LLVM's affiliation with Outreachy. My question, then, is "which party will be paying for the intern?"

      I ask, because it seems to me that, if Outreachy is providing the funding for the position, then Mr. Espindola has no pragmatic basis for objection, on the principle that "He that pays the piper calls the tune." OTOH, if LLVM itself is bearing the cost, then his objection to the organization itself behaving in a discriminatory fashion is fully justified.

      On the surface, if an outside group has offered to fund a paid internship (as long as the chosen candidate is sufficiently competent and knowlegeable about the main organization's area of specialization to actually contribute to the project, rather than impede it, because he/she requires excessive handholding by what would otherwise be productive members of the community), it seems reasonable to ask that everybody else just accept the new intern's help, and focus on writing great code.

      OTOH, suppose for a moment that the sponsoring, outside organization were, say, a white nationalist group. Would it then still be unreasonable for Mr. Espindola to object to LLVM's affiliation with it, even if none of that organization's own funds were involved? (That's a purposefully-extreme example, which I chose to illustrate the fact that Mr. Espindola's objection actually does seem to me to be on grounds of principle, rather than being a reflection of his personal attitude toward objectively-disadvantaged classes. It is, after all, beyond question that Outreachy's membership qualifications are actively discriminatory - the fact that they discriminate in favor of disadvantaged classes notwithstanding.)

      Basically, this seems to boil down to a case of pragmatism vs principles. Mr. Espindola appears to espouse the latter over the former - and I don't think he's wrong to do so, nor do I see room to criticize his priorities. But, perhaps there's some nuance (or even some fundamental principle) that I'm overlooking here, despite the fact that I don't personally have any stake in either this dispute or the organization at its center ... ?

      (Full disclosure: I strongly object to both social and workplace discrimination on any basis, whether it's racial, ethnic, religious, or sex- and/or sexual identity-based. However, I am not a developer. Until TFS caught my eye, I had no inkling that Mr. Espindola, LLVM, or Outreachy existed - and, because TFS is so poorly written, I still have zero idea exactly what LLVM focuses on, or why I should care. I get that it's an open-source development project - I just don't know what the heck it's developing, because TFS simply assumes that any reader already knows that. And, sans that crucial, missing information, I find it impossible to give enough of a damn even to bother googling it.)

      --
      Check out my novel.
    3. Re:Yeah, this is what he's talking about. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Is it your contention that all LLVM internships had to be through Outreachy? Because otherwise white US males can indeed get internships.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    4. Re:Yeah, this is what he's talking about. by malkavian · · Score: 1

      Hey, you're charging them as a murderer? They only killed one person..
      What he's objecting to is the constructed paradox that is being forced on him. Namely being told "You must treat everyone with respect and as an equal regardless of their attributed", then being associated with an organisation that openly discriminates based on skin and gender.
      You know all the disgust that people show when the subject is brought up of days of old where signs were hung up saying "No blacks allowed"? Well, in certain areas of the community, signs are going up saying "No white men allowed". And it's being cheered on as something great.
      That's what he's objecting to, the complete lack of ethics in this. It's something I rarely see in SJWs, real ethics. They virtue signal like crazy, yet openly peddle bigotry, but as long as it's their bigotry, it's all fine.

  27. Re:How horrable! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From reading the original message it seems he is unhappy with culture, sex or some other thing trumping suitability for the job. I love working in an environment of totally kickass people, no matter where they are from or what sex they are.

    But I don't want to find people different than myself who aren't the best and pretend that because they are all different somehow we will beat a team of great highly motivated people. It seems we are increasingly choosing diversity initially, vs talent initially.

    If your hiring strategy is to wait for the best people to show up instead of actively looking for them in every nook and cranny, then you deserve diversity hires.

    If you go all Moneyball, and actually LOOK for "totally kickass" people you'll find diversity by accident.

  28. Relevance? by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What ever happened to, "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog"? Diversity is irrelevant when you only know people by their email addresses! Just because I'm using the name of an old white philosopher doesn't mean I'm not a young black instagram model!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Relevance? by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're being naive. Conferences and social networks are still means by which people "move up in the pecking order". And now these formerly volunteer organizations are becoming conduits to salaried positions.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    2. Re:Relevance? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      How am I supposed to signal virtue if people think I'm a dog?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    3. Re:Relevance? by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      What ever happened to, "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog"? Diversity is irrelevant when you only know people by their email addresses! Just because I'm using the name of an old white philosopher doesn't mean I'm not a young black instagram model!

      Funny you should mention Instagram. I've also wondered why the popular kids of the 80s and 90s who used to make fun of us geeks, now embrace our precious technology as the best way to show off their superficiality. And why the biggest online business is advertising, with a little belfie sharing on the side.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    4. Re:Relevance? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Exactly women are equal if they hide the fact they're women and avoid taking advantages of things men can like using personal connections to get jobs. So equal. Just be like dogs.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  29. SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotry by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Informative

    For a while we've seen attempts like this in the open source world.

    Want to muscle your way into an OSS project, despite lacking the talent or skill (or willingness) to contribute anything other than drama, identity politics, and an insatiable urge control others (or remove them if they don't fall in line)? Force a Code of Conduct (which is often explicitly racist and/or sexist, dismissive of merit, and vague enough to be selectively enforced) down its throat! It even works on the largest, most influential projects, and lets you dictate developers' behavior on unrelated corners of the web!

    http://archive.is/4vV8z

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
    http://todogroup.org/opencodeo...

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
    http://contributor-covenant.or...

    http://developers.slashdot.org...
    https://www.reddit.com/r/freeb...

  30. Re:Sounds good to me by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

    The team would get along better, and more good people would enter. People who don't like the stuff outlined probably don't keep it to themselves. This creates tension in the group.

    I am dealing with this every day. So many people of very high achievement walked off of a group - over time - that we had a full team of experienced people for a new one once we had a welcoming group for them.

  31. Google is on a "mission" by davide+marney · · Score: 2

    As we've learned before, Google sees itself as being on some kind of social mission. They are not content to just give you good products and services, they intentionally USE those to influence you. I think this is an excellent case in point. If your skin color is not one that Outreachy likes, no internship for you. Likewise with your sexual preferences.

    What does ANY of this have to do with writing good code? Absolutely nothing. It's all about Google and Friends using their platforms to force their belief systems on the rest of us.

    It is very near time to ditch Google, to say nothing of the other technology giants. They're not content to stay in their lane and make good products, now they want to EVANGELIZE. If I want evangelism, I go to church.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:Google is on a "mission" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Do you have any evidence that Outreachy controls internships?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  32. Re:waaaaaah by poptix · · Score: 1

    Just because you're an AC doesn't mean people don't notice your writing style. Exactly how many times did you comment on this article trying to say the same thing different ways?

    --
    Just because you disagree doesn't mean it's not true.
  33. His actual words from the mail list by drnb · · Score: 4, Informative

    His actual words from the mail list:

    "The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry (1,2). This goes directly against my ethical views and I think I must leave the project to not be associated with this."
    http://lists.llvm.org/pipermai...

    1. Re:His actual words from the mail list by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Which doesn't really explain anything. If it was the last drop then he is saying that he did object to the code of conduct, without explaining why.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:His actual words from the mail list by drnb · · Score: 1

      Which doesn't really explain anything. If it was the last drop then he is saying that he did object to the code of conduct, without explaining why.

      His full statement at the link provided explains a lot.

    3. Re:His actual words from the mail list by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I read it and it really doesn't. Most of it is technical stuff, then this complete non-sequitor at the end without and explanation.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  34. Re:Important Questions by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1, Informative

    When even jcr and I can agree on something...

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  35. Re: Where's the beef? by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 1

    Your usage of "well documented" falls short of my definition. If Jesus did exist he may well have been a terrorist, but I'd like to see of contemporary evidence of that to start.

    --
    brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
  36. Re:Sounds good to me by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How does a higher percentage of participation from women in an organization help the organization if it doesn't result in a greater rate of code improvement?

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  37. Code of Conduct is a Symptom by JimToo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The code of conduct doesn't just land from Mars. It's the result of various people in the team agitating for change. The CoC might well be being promoted to give people who have a political agenda, not a coding agenda, the opportunity to gain more control.

    Software rewards a high degree of discipline, a coherent technical approach. It's sometimes necessary to prune code contributions that are rubbish in spite of the fact that this might hurt someone's feelings of self-worth. When this happens its easier to blame another's bias than your own incompetence.

    It would be interesting to know the level of code contribution, and its quality, from the promoters of the CoC.

    1. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. SJW crap is just a modern form of a bunch of incompetents trying to seize control, usually not because they care about anything the project does, but because they crave power, and, like all fanatics, feel their goals are so holy and superior and noble than the end justifies the means. Fortunately, this rarely works in a tech project. Usually the project just withers and dies because anybody smart will stay away when such an attack initially succeeds. Unfortunately, the tech community still has not learned to spot these utterly negative characters because they camouflage well, and hence they will just be free to move on to another project to destroy.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      It would be interesting to know the level of code contribution, and its quality, from the promoters of the CoC.

      You mean like Chris Lattner, the lead and person who has contributed about 10x the amount of the primadonna in the article?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Indeed. SJW crap is just a modern form of a bunch of incompetents trying to seize control,

      Chris Lattner is in charge and strongly supports the Code of Conduct. And he contributed much more than the subject of TFA. Buch of incompetents indeed.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Probably just a coward that went along with it....

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The other place codes of conduct come from is when the community is being poisoned by one or more assholes, disrupting communication and driving competent people away. It happens. Software contributions need to be judged on their merit, not on who they came from, and bigots won't adhere to that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    6. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Ah I see it's an axiom of yours that competent people can never be for a code of conduct.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You do not know what an "axiom" is.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      It's something that you have chosen as the fundamental basis of your reasoning.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And that is wrong. An Axiom is something that you explicitly assume to be true for a specific chain of reasoning, but that has to be independently proven to be correct for that chain of reasoning to relevant.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re:Code of Conduct is a Symptom by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And that is wrong.

      Nope.

      . An Axiom is something that you explicitly assume to be true for a specific chain of reasoning

      It can be implicit. Either way you are taking as axomatic that anynoe in favour of a CoC is incompetent.

      but that has to be independently proven to be correct for that chain of reasoning to relevant.

      And that, my good man, is precisely where you fall down.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  38. Re:How horrable! by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    Among other aspects, he's not getting paid for being the fifth highest contributor of submissions for LLVM, and yet for some reason he's being told that his contributions aren't as important as potentially getting more token women contributions.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  39. Re:How horrable! by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    If you go all Moneyball, and actually LOOK for "totally kickass" people you'll find diversity by accident.

    While I think that notion is a product of wishful thinking, I believe prioritizing diversity hires is an equal dose of delusional thinking.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  40. Can't stand the heat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Can't stand the heat?
    Then you get out of the kitchen.

  41. Re:How horrable! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    WE don't generally have these issues. It's not coders that do and non coders that fuck everything up. Coders understand all that truly matters IS THE CODE.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  42. Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or genderqu by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    These are the official requirements for the program he objects to, copy/pasted from their web page:
    --
    You must meet one of the following criteria:
    You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).

    You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander
    --

    They have decided to explicitly NOT treat people the same. You MUST be transgender or something in order to participate in the program and get the benefits.

    Most of the people I work with in open source, I don't know anything about their sexuality and I don't care. Not one bit. I care about the code - does it work, and has it been tested to be be sure that it works. Requiring me t inquire into someone's sexual preferences in order to determine how to process their code submissions would turn me off greatly as well.

  43. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At what point is it relevant or necessary to even mention or deal with the things you have problems with when dealing with a project involving code? You can only be racist or sexist if you actually say or do racist or sexist things. It's really simple. Here let me show you:

    Good
    "This code is horrible. It's poorly documented, its hacky, and it breaks other functions. These are good places to start in making this not terrible."

    You're addressing the code, not the person.

    Bad
    "This code is horrible. Maybe if your tits were brains you'd know how to at least document this garbage. Were you on the rag when you wrote this....Jesus just go back to making babies and let the men do the work."

    You've addressed the person and only acknowledged the code like once or twice.

    If the point of writing code was to make a program work, don't you think you should be concentrating on the code? It's totally asinine to bring anything else into it.

  44. From the article by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seems to me he was upset about people prying into him:

    I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared about my religion or political view.

    I don't want anyone interrogating me about my beliefs and views, so I don't blame him for leaving

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    1. Re:From the article by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Same here. Any form of inquisition in something like this is completely unacceptable. This is a technology project, not a cult. I would have left as well.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:From the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He linked to what bothered him the most. They were excluding qualified intern candidates based solely on their gender or sexual orientation. He wasn't allowed to go to conferences whilst publicly stating that this policy is wrong and discriminatory. So he left.

  45. So You Agree with the Dev? by Kunedog · · Score: 2

    It's the twisting of the word "discrimination" to be always bad. Discrimination is something everyone does everyday. How is it being used? Just to exclude women and minorities? That's bad.

    Read it. He's explicitly against discriminating based on sex and ancestry.

    Are you discriminating against a restauraunt that was in the news for an E. coli outbreak? That's not a bad use of discrimination or unreasonable.

    He supports discrimination based on merit. You've said absolutely nothing useful here . . . not about Rafael, anyway.

    1. Re:So You Agree with the Dev? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      He's explicitly against discriminating based on sex and ancestry.

      There are multiple forms of discrimination. I recognize that by virtue of there being lots of my peers who were into coding in highschool I also got into coding. I didn't need an outreach program because there was an existing program that was discriminatory based not on malice but on just the status quo.

      When there is a discrimination independent of merit (what gender your peers are) it's not unreasonable to have a special program to attempt to offer that same outreach to people who aren't being reached.

    2. Re:So You Agree with the Dev? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Read it. He's explicitly against discriminating based on sex and ancestry.

      Yet instead of doing something about the rampant disctrimination in the industry that he's apparently against, he's whining about an organisation thats trying to give a small number of people from somewhat excluded groups a leg up.

      Ethics, innit.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  46. The Code of Conduct states "try to understand" by emj · · Score: 1

    In other words if you are white male or female you can be openly harassed.

    Is this something that happens to you a lot in the Ubuntu and Python communities? If this is not an issue for you maybe you can think of an reason why we would need such rules.

  47. Re:How horrable! by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    "resort to anything that would violate those community standards in order to it then your points probably aren't that valid"

    Classic. So the validity of a statement is measured against how it aligns with a CoC. Amazing. Linus better hope they don't adopt such a CoC for the kernel. He will no longer be a great coder and all of his points will probably no longer be valid.

  48. Re:Bullying 2.0: Act like you are the victim, use by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    And, should a woman who is not victimized or harassed just leave and quit instead of playing the victim when a company has policies that are discriminatory and effect others?

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  49. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The highest contributor is Chris Lattner. I'm willing to bet he's the founder/leader of llvm. I also willing bet it's his wife/girlfriend/sister/unspecified_relative Tanya Lattner who is responsible for this bullshit. It was her, after all, who wanted to partner up with that puke-inducing Outreachy organization that specifically discriminates against whites or cisgendered men. I don't see her name on that list of top contributors in TFA, so I suppose this is how she contributes to the project instead?

    May this project crash, burn and rise from its ashes as a fork run by a meritocratically-minded group where the only property of your skin that matters is its thickness, your gender is only a problem if you make it one, and the only disability that gets you sympathy is RSI.

  50. Or you could find a different planet. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    This one is taken. By humans.

  51. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Oh wow -- for once in your life, there's something you aren't entitled to! How does it feel?"

    Is that what we've been striving for? Here i thought it was to be inclusive and more diverse; to give everyone the same opportunities white straight men have historically enjoyed. Was I wrong?

    Because apparently you consider it progress, even a victory, if we just make life shit for straight white men too.

  52. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oops. The mask slips. It was never about equality; it was about revenge.

  53. Another project sabotaged by SJWs.. by gweihir · · Score: 1

    And no, the link does not give the full story. Again, SJWs are requiring gender/race/other discrimination and submission to their views to force their screwed-up beliefs on everybody and they do so in a project where skill and insight is critical. Whenever skill and insight is critical, you _cannot_ be welcoming to newbies. You can only take the best and they have to prove their skill. Anything else kills the project. This is not some socializing club, this is hardcore engineering. Of course, for a project of this size, it takes a while to die, but it is going to happen now by basically keeping anybody away that primarily cares about technological excellence.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  54. One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by XXongo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let's be clear. That organization practices reverse discrimination in order to bring more women and minorities into the industry.

    And that purported "reverse" discrimination consisted of a single internship set aside for somebody who is not a heterosexual white male.

    That's it: one internship.

    If he's triggered by having even a single internship devoted to trying to address barriers to entry for women and minorities, I'll say that this wasn't the problem; it's just the excuse he's giving.

    1. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by internet-redstar · · Score: 2

      That's it: one internship.

      Nope, not even one... Link here.

      "Unfortunately, either the community coordinator or the Outreachy organizers have determined that the community will not participate in this round of Outreachy internships."

      and

      "The LLVM coordinator is Tanya Lattner"

      Which makes it an even more interesting turn of events - is she related with Chris Lattner, the LLVM maintainer - or is Chris in the process of gender changing? :-D

    2. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That's it: one internship.

      Hhahahahahahaha. You think it'll stay at one. That's cute.

    3. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      But don't dare call it nepotism.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Tanya is Chris Lattner's wife and a longtime software developer at Apple
      http://nondot.org/tonic/Welcom...

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    5. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      And that purported "reverse" discrimination consisted of a single internship set aside for somebody who is not a heterosexual white male.

      That's it: one internship.

      So, how many institutional acts of discrimination would an organization need to engage in before you’d object? Because what you’re arguing here is that “it’s just a little one, so it’s okay.” At what point does the discrimination become too much for you?

      Hearing what you’re saying, I’m reminded of an apocryphal conversation attributed to Winston Churchill:

      Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?

      Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course...

      Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?

      Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!

      Churchill: Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

      Moreover, there’s nothing “purported” about it. They’re explicitly excluding people based on gender identity, nationality, and ethnicity. That’s straight up discrimination. You may be right in suggesting that he’s using this as a cover for his own prejudices, but don’t use your desire to call him out as a justification for condoning discrimination.

    6. Re: One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      We wouldn't want to draw attention to the uncomfortable truth that nearly all "social justice" bigots are useless upper class twits who gained their positions of power entirely through nepotism.

    7. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by narcc · · Score: 1

      It's not discrimination.

      Calling it discrimination is a neat rhetorical trick, but the goal isn't exclusion, but inclusion. That's the difference.

      Sometimes, to achieve equal opportunity, you must make special accommodations. Calling that "discrimination" is disingenuous.

    8. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by Marisaze · · Score: 1

      It's the text book definition of discrimination.


      Discrimination
      In human social affairs, discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person based on the group, class, or category to which the person is perceived to belong.

      You can claim it's "good discrimination" but it's still discrimination.

    9. Re:One internship [Re: Meet minimum standards] by narcc · · Score: 1

      The reason you use the word "discrimination" is because of the negative connotations. It's nothing but empty rhetoric. It does not help your case. It does not refute the claims made by myself and others here.

      Discrimination, in the ordinary/positive sense, is a normal and necessary part of our daily lives. An example I gave earlier: That you can't join the local cub scout pack is not 'age discrimination' even though the cub scouts discriminate based on age.

      Conflating the two ideas with a ridiculous rhetorical trick (the words are identical, not the meanings) is dishonest.

      You'll trick a few people, surely. The majority, however, can easily see through that kind of nonsense.

  55. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by aitikin · · Score: 1
    To clarify, the program the parent is referring to is Outreachy:

    These are the official requirements for the program he objects to, copy/pasted from their web page: -- You must meet one of the following criteria: You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).

    You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander --

    While I get that that may be upsetting that they're trying to act in an affirmative action mindset, I believe that the whole point of this is to get more of these individuals who can do the work as well or better than some who may already work with projects, into the project to do the work. The idea that they're going to stop accepting code from cis hetero men just because they're trying to encourage these people to take part is asinine.

    --
    "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
  56. Re:waaaaaah by sexconker · · Score: 1

    I saw 4 but I only briefly scrolled through.

  57. Re:How horrable! by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Why do you always assume these diversity rules are just checkboxes to pick up unqualified people.
    Often companies have setup artificial barriers to prevent diversity, despite qualifications.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  58. Re:How horrable! by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    That worked out well for James Damore.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  59. Re:How horrable! by tbannist · · Score: 1

    Among other aspects, he's not getting paid for being the fifth highest contributor of submissions for LLVM, and yet for some reason he's being told that his contributions aren't as important as potentially getting more token women contributions.

    That's an interesting perspective. How did you conclude that his contributions weren't as important as "getting more token women contributions"? The group he objects to being associated with is specifically about encouraging under-represented groups to participate more often in open source. It literally has no effect on his contributions.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  60. Data doesn't support conclusion by XXongo · · Score: 1

    Here's some data: by an informal count of gender-recognizable top 1000 kernel contributors to Linux kernel I did several years ago, there were 8 women (I recognize western and slavic names, first names I didn't recognize were skipped). A more thorough count of all "key" packages (as defined by testing migration criteria) in Debian Stretch, where I tried to guess gender based on first name, ldap, ~60 seconds of web search for that person -- shown 0.9% of last uploaders being female, with each female having only 60% packages on the average (although, with low population of data, this last figure might be not significant enough).

    your data is interesting. You go on to make a conclusion, however, that is not based in any way on that data. You conclude "Thus, I believe this is approximately the natural gender ratio of skilled software engineers." However, your data would just as reasonably fit a conclusion "Thus, I believe that there are things in the software community that discriminate against women and drive women away from the community."

    Like, perhaps, constant and unrelenting harassment:
    http://fortune.com/2018/02/06/brotopia-emily-chang-tech-sexual-harassment/
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/28/google-lawsuit-sexual-harassment-bro-culture
    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-silicon-valley-so-awful-to-women/517788/
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/23/google-bro-culture-led-to-violence-sexual-harassment-against-female-engineer-lawsuit-alleges/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/technology/women-entrepreneurs-speak-out-sexual-harassment.html

    Since one of the things he was objecting to was a code of conduct saying
    Harassment and other exclusionary behavior aren't acceptable. This includes, but is not limited to: Violent threats or language directed against another person. Discriminatory jokes and language. Posting sexually explicit or violent material. Posting (or threatening to post) other people’s personally identifying information (“doxing”). Personal insults, especially those using racist or sexist terms. Unwelcome sexual attention. Advocating for, or encouraging, any of the above behavior.

    I think he doesn't have any interest in solving this problem.

    1. Re:Data doesn't support conclusion by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You are misrepresenting the reason he quit. It wasn't because "he doesn't have any interest in solving this problem.". Personal attacks on his character are NOT ok.

  61. Re:How horrable! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Not really true. Companies hire incompetent people all the time. Companies almost never hire the best and brightest, and incompetent white males in the industry far outnumber the competent white males by an order of magnitude. If we're really going to be fair here, then incompetent women and minorities need to be hired just to catch up.

    It's a hypocritical double standard when a competent woman or minority is not hired because they don't meet certain quality standards when at the same time the bozo with no skills gets hired because he got a recommendation from a friend.

  62. Re:How horrable! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    But everyone works with people who are not the best, I don't care what project you are on. Maybe you can say you got the best out of the limited pool to choose from, but you didn't get the best in every position. Every project always has a small subset that are just hangers on, doing the minimum necessary to not get fired.

    And this is LLVM, no one gets "hired" there. The code of conduct basically just says treat your coworkers with respect, which unfortunately had to be spelled out in detail because of socially incompetent people who don't know what respect means.

  63. What it were a different criteria? by Johnberg · · Score: 1

    Would he have left if it were another organization like Outreachy but it only gave scholarships to students of low income households? Why do people of privilege get so upset when someone tries to help people who are usually marginalized or not given (or can't find) opportunities? You can't help the world by making everything equal when in reality it still won't be equal.

  64. Wow, dude, lighten up. by Brannon · · Score: 2

    > You're assuming correlation implies causation

    No, I'm assuming that if there's a historically under-represented group then it may be due to any number of factors--some of which may be addressed by spending a little effort actively trying to boost participation.

    Sure, you can choose to look at it as a form of discrimination. Or you could develop a thicker skin and go back to your Ayn Rand novel.

  65. I read the CoC and his mailing list post by Brannon · · Score: 1

    my post was an adequate summary of both.

  66. Discrimination OK if only part time? by drnb · · Score: 2

    He's leaving because the intern program openly discriminates based on gender, sexual orientation, or ancestry. Basically, they won't hire a white American male as an intern.

    You're pointing to a specific outreach program, not to LLVM's entire intern program.

    So LLVM only discriminates part of the time. What percentage of discrimination is OK? 10%, 25%, 49%, ...?

  67. Show me where the CoC permits persecution. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    And since when is an "affinity group" == "discriminatory group"? Is a Christian sunday school class discriminatory because it doesn't allow non-Christian teachers? Is my college alumni organization discriminatory because you have to be an alum to join? Do you want 10,000 more examples?

    All that happened here is that in your messed up self-centered universe you interpreted "let's get more LGBT/women into tech" as "let's get rid of all those cis straight white males in tech".

    1. Re:Show me where the CoC permits persecution. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Gender is a protected class. The rest of your post is irrelevant nonsense.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  68. Only half joking by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    be friendly and patient,
    be welcoming,
    be considerate,
    be respectful,
    be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others, and
    when we disagree, try to understand why.

    The first 5 of those really conflicts with the traditions of compiler development. My experiences have always been a bunch of very intelligent people screaming at each other and aggressively trying to demonstrate their rightness and technical superiority. (I've never be in the LLVM community, so I don't know how it compares)

    It's more than waiving dicks around. It's about showing who has the biggest brain. It's sort of a cross between a meritocracy and Lord of the Flies. It's probably not healthy, nor the most practical way to operate. But I do see the behavior in various degrees in many projects that are technical, specialized, and isolated from the rest of the industry.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  69. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Cederic · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You can only be racist or sexist if you actually say or do racist or sexist things.

    What the fuck does being racist or sexist have to do with it.

    It's all down to what you can be accused and lynched of. If you want a recent example, investigate the situation James Damore found himself in.

  70. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 2

    Okay, I'll concede that you probably neither know nor care about the gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or ethnicity of any of the OSS projects that you participate in.

    But I'll make a wild prediction: most of the people participating are cis-male, white and straight, and a majority of that number are all three at once.

    See, the problem is less that you don't know, but that I can make such a bold claim without knowing exactly how each project is made up, and almost certainly be right. (I do, of course, accept the possibility that I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not.)

    Encouraging people that are outside the current OSS community can't hurt anything. These are people that are underrepresented, and I bet there are a lot of people out there that are never encouraged to go into it, or are actively discouraged from being there. I know two women that work at Google that consistently face men talking down to them, despite them both being experts in their field. One of them has a male assistant who is constantly telling people that come over to talk that he's just the hired help, and my friend with the PhD is actually the person that the visitor needs to talk to. Many men don't know what to do with that, and continue to try to talk to the assistant, hoping against all hope that maybe it'll just work out if they pretend a woman isn't in charge.

    A couple simple anecdotes, consistently backed up by every woman I know in tech. Trans and queer people have their own struggles with being hired at all.

    To object to this program is really the height of eye-rolling fragility. This organization just wants to make the pie bigger, not take anyone's slice of pie away, and this guy can't deal with that. Good riddance. The 'one great person' fallacy needs to die—his contributions will be missed, I'm sure, but someone will take his place. Even Lattner himself wasn't irreplaceable.

  71. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    when there isn't as big an asymmetry in violence between sexes...

    Women suffer less violence than men, at least as objectively measured in terms of deaths per 100k inhabitants. As such, reducing the asymmetry can mean either decreasing violence against men until it reaches the same level women enjoy, or increasing violence against women until it reaches the same level men endure. I guess you're proposing the former, right?

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  72. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by Cederic · · Score: 2

    He's not entitled to fairness in the family courts.
    Shit, he's not entitled to justice from the justice system.
    He's not entitled to 80% of the scholarships and bursaries out there. Make that 98% if you exclude sports ones.
    He's not entitled to vote without putting his life at risk.
    He's not entitled to the same life expectancy as half the population.,
    He's not entitled to equal education.

    Hang on. Remind me, what the fuck _is_ he entitled to?

  73. Read before commenting [Re:Code Vs Emotion] by XXongo · · Score: 1

    Yes, I agree. A code of conduct that says you should be nice to people?!

    He isn't objecting to a code of conduct that only says be nice to people; it says other things too.

    Yes, I already pointed this out and linked to the actual code in my first message in this thread.

    Learn to read previous messages in the thread before commenting.

    1. Re:Read before commenting [Re:Code Vs Emotion] by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Yup, and "you should be nice to people" is the only thing the Code of Conduct says.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  74. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Junta · · Score: 2

    The 'good' example would also run afoul of some codes of contacts, as the tone may be considered too rude.

    Also, when someone is rude to someone else, without even *knowing* their race/gender identity/etc, the offended person has on occasion asserted they were the target of hurtful language because of their situation relative to one of those groups, despite lack of any hint of references to that early on.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  75. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    I agree, this is some weird shit. Good for him for quitting. I think this SJW stuff has hopefully jumped the shark.

  76. Re:Sounds good to me by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

    Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.
    They don't care. Lots of people don't care. The idea of social justice at the expense of the skill the actual prejudiced people bring to the table is acceptable. That's a valid position to hold.
    You may not agree with it, you may think it's smarter to just accept the prejudiced people. You're also entitled to that opinion. If enough of you are ever in control of body involved with a large open source project, you can make your own CoC that says "I don't care what you say or do. You can act how you like."

    And I'll fully respect that CoC. I won't be a part of that community, but I'll respect its rules.

  77. Chris Lattner's Orwellian Tweet by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

    "it is critical to the long term health of the project that we preserve an inclusive community." -- Chris Lattner

    From the Outreachy Elegibility Rules: "You must meet one of the following criteria:
    You live any where in the world and you identify as a woman (cis or trans), trans man, or genderqueer person (including genderfluid or genderfree).
    You live in the United States or you are a U.S. national or permanent resident living aboard, AND you are a person of any gender who is Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander"

    So white men, Asian men, and Middle-Eastern men are excluded. This is "inclusive" in the same sense that war is peace and slavery is freedom.

  78. Re:How horrable! by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

    Classic. So the validity of a statement is measured against how it aligns with a CoC.

    Classic. What if a CoC says: "Statements must be empirically true."
    Your argument is stupid on its face.

    Amazing. Linus better hope they don't adopt such a CoC for the kernel. He will no longer be a great coder and all of his points will probably no longer be valid.

    Nope. He may still be a great coder, and all his points may even be valid. He'll just no longer be welcome to contribute to that project, and that project will consider themselves better off for it, which is their right.

    You just love twisting logic into knots to make a point, don't you?

  79. Re: How horrable! by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    You're a big fan of ReiserFS, no doubt.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  80. I really don't want to look in my co-workers beds by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > If you already happen to have a demographically-representative set of people working with you, you don't have to use it. However, until that day arrives, programs like Outreachy can help you to rectify that situation.

    I don't know, or care, how many people I work with call themselves "gender-free", how many enjoy sex with women, or any of that. All of that is SO completely irrelevant to work. You and they seriously think that when I'm reviewing code submissions, to make sure they work correctly and have appropriate security, I should make sure to ask who the coder sleeps with? It's okay to introduce a security problem, if the coder has sex with multiple people over the age of 70, I guess? Your thinking is just bizarre.

    > You don't have to care, and are in fact being encouraged to not care.

    What part of "requirements: you must be transgender" do you not understand?

  81. In other words, you live in the bay area? by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Sounds like you live in the bay area? 99.99% of the world isn't San Francisco. Open source projects especially are world-wide endeavors, and by far most people world wide are not "cis-male, white and straight, the majority of that number are all three at once".

    Heck, even in your little bay area garden, most people aren't male and straight, if you haven't noticed.

  82. Re:How horrable! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Among other aspects, he's not getting paid for being the fifth highest contributor of submissions for LLVM

    With 2.7% of contributions. IOW his contributions are dwarfed by the team which is why the person wiht the highest number of contrbutions thinks the COC which keeps most of the team together is the best way forward.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  83. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    "Want to muscle your way into an OSS project, despite lacking the talent or skill (or willingness) to contribute anything other than drama, identity politics, and an insatiable urge control others (or remove them if they don't fall in line)?"

    Lattner contributed over 5x as much as this guy, and supported all this stuff. He was there long before too.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  84. If 'don't be an asshole' is too hard... by mhkohne · · Score: 1

    then yes, please leave. I've dealt personally with a few 'smart assholes' in my time, and in the end I usually find out that they aren't half as smart as they'd have you think, but they sure are assholes.

    The code of conduct isn't particularly onerous, and if you can't behave decently, then your mamma didn't beat you enough. Please go hide from the world in your basement, making bigoted comments on XBox live.

    --
    A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
    1. Re:If 'don't be an asshole' is too hard... by malkavian · · Score: 2

      You obviously didn't read about the ethics behind all this, that Rafael didn't want to be associated with an organisation that blatantly discriminated against a large set of the population (Outreachy), especially when the Code of Conduct explicitly said "You can't discriminate". So logically, the community should spin, and automatically disband itself, as it's actively discriminating when it's core CoC says it isn't allowed.
      He just wanted to get on with the code, and treat people as people. Now the overzealous Social Justice crowd have got entrenched, he just has better things to do with his time than play petty politics. So he's taking his skills elsewhere.
      Sounds fair enough to me.

  85. Stop trying to appease people who don't care about by elainerd · · Score: 2

    the industry. It isn't blue haired SJWs that have got us to this point. Is LLVM trying to create the BEST software or are they abandoning that goal and choosing to appease the perpetually offended. It is a lie that women are being stopped entry or being discouraged from tech jobs. A woman in tech, even in the 1990s would get an interview to see if they HAD THE SKILLS. People gravitate to what they are interested in, WHAT THEY ARE GOOD AT, and what they WANT TO DO. That's how FREE MARKETS work and create wealth. You can't force people into jobs just to full-fill the wet dreams of some hand-wringing SJW. The guys who fix the roads get paid A LOT more than you think and women are under-represented in that field also, Maybe they don't want to stand in the sun all day and maybe they don't want to sit behind a keyboard all day. You can't fix personal choice.

    --
    Faith: Belief in Truth. Superstition: Belief in Falsehood.
  86. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Cederic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Congratulations on missing my point.
    Damore has been publicly castigated for being supposedly misogynist, despite at no point actually being sexist.

  87. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by war4peace · · Score: 1

    What part of "IT'S ILLEGAL" do you fail to understand?
    Encouraging minorities and women to apply? Hell yeah, I'm all for it, please do! But do it legally, for fuck's sake.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  88. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    May this project crash, burn and rise from its ashes as a fork run by a meritocratically-minded group

    You're not interested in a meritocracy. What you are proposing is an assholeocracy with some sort of minimum standard for skill.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  89. Re:How horrable! by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    I'm not twisting logic. It is YOUR logic. You said: "resort to anything that would violate those community standards in order to it then your points probably aren't that valid". How is that even logical? A valid point is valid no matter how it is presented.

  90. For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) kid by raymorris · · Score: 2

    Thank you and all who think like you for trying to help my kid, who is both black and female. It's appreciated.

    My kid, a black woman, does not in fact need your condescending "help" to contribute to any open source project. It's just patronizing and insulting for you to act like she can't do whatever she decides to do, on your own merit with her own skills - to say that she needs your help.

    What she needs from you guys is for you to instead spend that time proofreading and unit testing your own shit, so she doesn't have to spend her time fixing your mistakes. The thing is, she's smarter than you guys. She's even smarter than Bruce, and Bruce is a pretty smart guy.

  91. Encouragement vs. exclusion by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

    If there was a program to accept an intern, open to anyone regardless of skin tone or sexuality, and outreachy went out, and recruited just non-white non-male people to apply to that program, that would be *encouraging*.

    By explicitly running a program that turned away any white males from even applying, they were going a step beyond. Rather than engaging in "encouragement", they were automatically filtering out people of an undesirable color and undesirable sex.

    A good way of deciding if a policy is a good one, is for you to write it, and let other people swap out any racial or sexual orientation terms as they want to. If any formulation of your policy, when swapped around with terms defined by your ideological enemies, sounds bad, then it is.

  92. Outreach vs. exclusion by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

    Outreach means going to find underrepresented minorities, and encouraging them to apply for a job.

    A job opening might usually get 99% cis-white male applicants, but with outreach, you could change that ratio to say, 50% underrepresented minority, 50% cis-white male. No guarantee the cis-white male won't win, but you change the pool of applicants. That's outreach.

    Exclusion means opening up a job position *only* for underrepresented minorities. 100% you'll exclude cis-white males. This is immoral discrimination.

    1. Re:Outreach vs. exclusion by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Both kinds of efforts are labeled "diversity programs".. I like your distinction.. If your effort is outreach based, have at it. If it's discriminatory, it's a problem.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  93. Re:For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

    I am confident that your kid can do whatever she wants. The problem is that I need 100,000 more like her. And some number of those kids are perfectly capable of the job, but have impostor syndrome or some other deficit in self confidence, etc. That is not a racial issue, but on top of everything else it keeps them from getting the employment they deserve.

  94. undo by jmccue · · Score: 1

    Posting to undo some moderation because I only partially agree with what they said. There still seems to be a lot of discrimination out there but I am do not know how this can be a huge deal in an internet based project, unless you have a name that identifies what 'group/s' you can be in. Maybe it is time for these projects to insist on using 'fake' names or even numbers.

  95. Re:Bullying 2.0: Act like you are the victim, use by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    You don't really get that this is a threaded discussion do you?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  96. Re:How horrable! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Yup. Read the Labor Relations Board findings. Damore wasn't fired because of his views, but because he was aggressive about pushing them on others to the point of disrupting the workplace and getting his memo leaked.

    If you can't get people at work to agree with your political views by calmly discussing them when appropriate, you should stop trying to convince people at work.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  97. Re:How horrable! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Some coders, sure, and that's a good thing. Others have assorted prejudices and inflict them on others.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  98. Re: Where's the beef? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    We have very, very little on Jesus that doesn't come from the Bible. People study ancient Greek to understand the Gospels without the barrier of translation, and they study the historical period - in other words, they try to read the Bible more accurately and understand the context of his time. I don't remember anything about the Iscari in the Bible; could you provide a cite?

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  99. Community Mentoring Centers by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

    Setup mentoring centers directly in those communities, open to anyone in the community. By sheer demographic force, you'll hit the under-represented minorities, but you'll do so without being discriminatory. Since hey, that white kid with native parents living in a ghetto neighborhood in Detroit is also disadvantaged. Certainly moreso than a rich black male from San Francisco.

    The trick here is that you can't fix the problem is all you do is put up more barriers - you have to increase the pool of qualified applicants, and that's hard, slogging work through not only the educational system in the ghetto, but the culture of "keeping it real" that denigrates academic success and being "too white".

  100. Just stop raping. by hsthompson69 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can encourage more minorities to apply for a job, increasing their representation in the applicant pool, without discriminating against any other applicants.

    However, if you explicitly exclude applicants based on being straight, white, and male, you're actively discriminating based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender.

    Fighting discrimination with more discrimination is like fighting rape with more rape. Just stop raping.

  101. Re:For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) by 24-bit+Voxel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The freer the society, the fewer women in STEM. Are we to force women to study things that they aren't interested in?

    https://www.theatlantic.com/sc...

    Where are the programs to get more males into teaching? Shouldn't that also be a big problem that we need to discriminate to solve?

    Why does this door swing only 1 way?

  102. Re:For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

    I think you need to look at why the women aren't interested in tech. There is still a very large nature vs. nurture question there which the "more free" societies may not yet have addressed.

  103. Bullshit. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    You're looking at this wrong.

    Under-representation is a problem because there are people that currently feel excluded from OSS, and they feel excluded partly because of the bad behaviour of some people in the OSS community, and also because after years of not being encouraged to be around, some people have decided that it would be nice to throw some encouragement to those under-represented groups.

    Nope. Wrong to the nth degree.

    Wanna code? Get a laptop, hook it to the next internet outlet and get going. Nobody is stoping you. It's easyer than ever, even for poor fat black lesbian girls. And - pro tip - on the internet nobody gives a flying f*ck about your race, gender or your sexual interest. And most people don't even know. Guess why so many weirdos are into coding? If however you have a neat project going, people will come, pull your code and eventually contribute. And if your a good coder and manager - even if you're at times a douche in the real world (Linus Torwalds comes to mind) - your project will fly. Wether you're a women or a black guy - nobody effing cares. Seriously. Angela Merkel is an old lady. If someone gets in her way, she squishes them like a bug and she actually does the hours it takes to be a chancellor. Nobody cares wether she's a woman or not. Not these days. 200 years ago maybe. But not today and shure as f*ck not on the intarweb.

    You're welcome.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  104. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by complete+loony · · Score: 1

    Google has some scope to discriminate in favour of "underrepresented" groups and still fill a room with talented people. But you can't "fix" the entire employment sector this way. Even if everyone is given the exact same opportunity to work in this career, doesn't mean that everyone who ends up choosing this work will represent the same breakdown as the entire population.

    I'm not saying that the current environment is giving people the same opportunities, and I would support measures to improve that situation. But blindly discriminating against talented people based on them being white males isn't the answer.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  105. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by chaboud · · Score: 1

    Whoa... Whoa... A minimum standard for skill? Lunatics, every one of them....

    Code by random walk and user rating is the only way forward.

  106. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

    All this SJW stuff comes from the stupid diligent

    No it doesn't. It comes from people who are trying to create a world in which people are treated with respect irrespective of their sex, skin colour, social class, ethnicity, language, self-identification or any other characteristic not directly related to the work in which they are engaged. It seems staggeringly simple to me. Which part of it do you disagree with?

  107. Re:Sounds good to me by piojo · · Score: 1

    The team would get along better, and more good people would enter. People who don't like the stuff outlined probably don't keep it to themselves. This creates tension in the group.

    Have you met him? Because that seems speculative.

    --
    A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  108. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by onepoint · · Score: 1

    I thought with open code projects ( and the very few I was doing in the 90's),
    You did your joy, posted the fixes and kept going ( I liked bug hunting and code optimization ).

    if you are a drama queen, your access was removed from the project, by the project leader.
    You could always get the source code and fork over to something new.

    --
    if you see me, smile and say hello.
  109. Re:How horrable! by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    The group he objects to being associated with is specifically about encouraging under-represented groups to participate more often in open source.

    The group he objects to being associated with specifically discriminates against people who state anything that can be construed as critical towards peers when they belong to a "protected" group.

    It literally has no effect on his contributions.

    Until he may say something that could be construed as negative towards "protected" individuals.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  110. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by onepoint · · Score: 1

    Well put. Maybe in another light, we can also say, we are trying to become more human, like star trek, a better class of ourselves.

    As we approach becoming human, we will have to deal with people that want right now, and truthfully, is a slow process to make a change.
    1865 April the American civil war ended. 2018 black men are still considered suspects at Starbucks.
    Busing started in 1972-74 ish, to help poverty-stricken kids get to the better schools on the other side of the tracks, I just recently read about a school where that ended and it went back to being a low achievement school.

    Real Change is in action like this, where failure might happen, but a few will come from it better, and slowly it grows.

    --
    if you see me, smile and say hello.
  111. Re: Sounds good to me by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

    You're right. But I have actually gotten a good look at the Outreachy program today. And it's so freaking innocuous. For 3 months of internship a $5,000 stipend for a living, and a $500 travel stipend. This is not employment. Who can live for 3 months on $5,000 anymore even if the organization is providing food and lodging. And the guy quit over that? It just doesn't make any sense.

  112. Re: Sounds good to me by piojo · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I assume he has some deeper discomfort with the social justice movement. I do as well, in its current incarnation. I didn't ten years ago. So it's probably not about wanting to discriminate.

    --
    A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  113. Re: For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) by Evtim · · Score: 1

    There is no such debate it's false dichotomy. Also in Scandinavia the social pressure is in the noise these days.

    You people are really communists eh? Forcing the populous to conform to your distorted worldview regardless of their desires. Damn I thought it all ended on 10.11.1989. BTW as someone who has lived in the 'equity paradise', I for one will fight you every step of the way, though sometimes I wish you'd win and learn what the revolution does to its children. If not for the millions of innocent people that you'd kill before that I'd just sit and laugh...

  114. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    Ahhhhhh - good old nepotism. Par for the course in Surveillance Valley.

  115. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    #VirginMaleFeminist

  116. Re:How horrable! by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

    I'm quite sure I didn't write that abortion of a sentence you just quoted me on.
    Time to up the meds, amigo.

    You mocked someone for the apparently obscene notion that alignment of a statement measured against *a* CoC, as if that were a logic violation.
    It isn't if "don't be full of shit." is the stipulation violated.
    What you want is the freedom to say whatever the fuck stupid bullshit you want in a group and them to be forced to continue accepting you. No, go play with yourself in the corner, kiddo.

  117. LLVM? by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Never heard of it. I looked it up, still don't know what it stands for.

  118. Re: Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gend by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    He's entitled to free insults from rich dumb "social justice" hypocrites, of course.

  119. Re: Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gend by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    You lost me at "cis-". Why do you feel it necessary to use hate speech?

  120. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by mishehu · · Score: 1

    I'm just going to leave this here... And the wage disparity may not be as big as the perception is, though I don't have the articles at my fingertips. (As I recall, the ones that show the largest gaps did not do a proper apples-to-apples comparison of the positions held by the women in the study.) But I still fail to understand why there's this dire need to get more women and more non-"caucasian"-cisgender men in this specific field. The lack of them is not in of itself a problem any more than a lack of male nurses is in of itself a problem either. I grew up as more or less an outcast among my peers due to my interest in computing. I'm sure many others who are my age or older that work in this field had similar experiences, at least in certain countries.

  121. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Personally, I would rather have actively good developers rather than ones that merely pass a minimum standard of skill. But you're welcome to choose otherwise.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  122. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Are you shaming someone for the number of sexual partners they've had? How very patriarchal of you.

  123. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    "assholeocracy"

    I'm gonna use that

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  124. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    The labour board thought he was sexist. I'm willing to bet that the court agrees when his lawsuit finally matures.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  125. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    I've never gone more than three sentences without referencing someone's tiddies. Sometimes I use it as a greeting.

  126. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    That's probably why he was talking about Tanya Lattner, who has not contributed 5x as much. You know, the one who actually suggested the Outreach program...

  127. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    The SJW stuff comes from morons that think cute and cuddly words are enough to put a lustre on atrocious actions. You know, like Soviet.

    Here's a guide to help you.
    If you think there's a difference between an asshole and a rectal exit then congratulations, you are dumb enough to qualify for the chuch of social justice. If you think discrimination is acceptable based on the skin color of the victim, then you will fit right in. If you think everyone is equal but some are more equal then others... And of course, if you think differences between the sexes are all cultural and we are all the same but men are biologically determined to be rapists, you just might win a SocJus award.

    Hope that helps.

  128. Re:For anyone who thinks this, my (black, female) by tigersha · · Score: 1

    Or into nursing.

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  129. Re: How horrable! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Presumably the diversity people aren't actually disrupting the workplace. It isn't a matter of disagreeing with viewpoints, it's a matter of what is done.

    It seems fairly common to have dissenting views from the majority, get obnoxious about it, and blame any negative reaction on the views, not the presentation.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  130. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigo by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    It would be nice to quote the pasaage in question and not merely assert its existence.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  131. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by dnaumov · · Score: 1

    You seem confused. SJWs want people to treat others with respect BECAUSE of their sex, skin colour, social class, ethnicity, language, self-identification or any other characteristic not directly related to the work. Meanwhile, sane people are telling them to fuck off and that they will continue their merit-based approach.

  132. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Except that I added the report of the Labor Relations Board to what the Damore partisans were saying.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  133. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The Labor Board also discussed what Damore was actually doing, not just what his views were.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  134. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Were people aggressively pushing their political views at work in the same sense? Damore was working inside a large population that didn't share his views, and saw things happening around him that he disagreed with, sure. That's not having other views pushed onto you in a disruptive manner.

    I did read the Labor Relations Board ruling, which probably means I've looked into his behavior in more detail than most other posters.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  135. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The point is that Google didn't want an actively sexist and misogynist employee being aggressive with his views in ways that disrupted the company. You can be sexist and misogynist and still work professionally with women.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  136. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by narcc · · Score: 1

    You know as well as I do that there is no such thing as a meritocracy. This alleged "merit-based approach" is nothing more than a lie you, and others here, tell yourselves to justify antisocial behavior.

    Ask yourself: If this was truly a meritocracy, why do underrepresented groups need to hide some aspect of their identity or risk being treated unfairly? The answer is obvious, of course. There is no meritocracy. They will be treated unfairly regardless of the quality of their work should anyone discover that they're not a 20-30 white male.

    What I'm most interested in hearing, if you don't mind a bit of self-reflection, is why you so strongly want to deny that simple truth. Is it fear? Maybe you get a sense of satisfaction using abusive language? Do you think yourself superior because of your race, gender, or other property and want to maintain that belief? Something else entirely?

  137. Er, no by Anubis350 · · Score: 2

    Er no. I just poked around a bit on the LLVM and Outreachy websites and as best I can tell:

    *This is about 1 internship slot, not the entire scholarship program (and not even that because it doesnt look like one happened with LLVM this year through Outreachy, period). Outreachy would provide funding for an intern in one of the underserved groups they cater to.

    *It doesnt mean there can't be other interns outside that program

    *This doesnt seem to effect the rest of LLVM's scholarship program

    I'm hard pressed to figure out what de Espindola's problem is with this, or with the code of conduct which really seems to boil down to "don't call someone out because of race, gender, ethnicity, etc, and don't get upset if they tell you to go shove it in return"

    --
    "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
  138. Re:SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigotr by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    That's SJW logic for you. Basically they can replace "and" with "because". "You said this code was shit and it was written by a lesbian midget" becomes "You said this code was shit because it was written by a lesbian midget".

    And it's no defense that you didn't know. You suspected it, and even if you manage to exceed the bounds of logic by proving they you didn't suspect it, you still treated them the same way you would have done if you *did* know.

    Shame on you!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  139. he left by p0larity · · Score: 1

    ...and nothing of value was lost

  140. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by narcc · · Score: 1

    It's not illegal. I'm going to assume that he knows it's not illegal and thus didn't consider that claim in his reply.

  141. Re:Opposite. Requirements: Must be, trans or gende by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

    I know two women that work at Google that consistently face men talking down to them, despite them both being experts in their field. One of them has a male assistant who is constantly telling people that come over to talk that he's just the hired help, and my friend with the PhD is actually the person that the visitor needs to talk to. Many men don't know what to do with that, and continue to try to talk to the assistant, hoping against all hope that maybe it'll just work out if they pretend a woman isn't in charge.

    It is great that you know some women. Did you also know that other women treat women in the work place worse than your examples of men treating women. They would expect the man to be in charge also, and would be ever worse in the way they treat the other women. It has been studied and is not a man thing.

    --

    -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  142. Re:How horrable! by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

    Some group should just make a CoC that says SJW's are not allowed. Then the problem will be prevented in the first place.

    --

    -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  143. What I Have Learned From This Discussion by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

    I'm that Social Justice Warrior that some folks object to. What I have learned from this discussion is that if you really want to piss off the folks who don't like SJWs, having an affirmative action program is very highly effective. And you can start for less than $10,000 with this group: outreachy.org. Or if you don't have the cash, they can get it elsewhere and put a deserving person from a disadvantaged group (like a woman) in your organization for a 3-month internship. I am definitely going to make use of that knowledge!

  144. Re:Hypocrite alarm! by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    MMMMMM, the hypocrisy is juicy. A conservative telling someone to accept people as they are, when you can't.

    I'm not a conservative. I'm an equal opportunity hater of both SJWs and gun toting rednecks.

    I mean, would we even need these CoCs if it weren't for the fact that Mr Asshole can't stop calling people fags?

    The politics are often not introduced based on organic need but rather someone installed into a role where their responsibility is generating bureaucratic policy.

    llvm list archives are public. You could actually search them and point out all of the assholes calling others fags but you won't find it because it hasn't happened.

    http://lists.llvm.org/mailman/...

  145. Lesson learned by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    Lesson learned: when abandoning a volunteer effort out of concern that it is becoming an environment where witch hunts can thrive, best not to say so to the hunters.

    "I'm leaving for reasons I'd rather not share. Those who disagree with my reasons would get likely all butt-hurt and nasty if I did, and I don't need the aggravation. If in the future it turns out my reason for leaving is no longer reason enough, I'll be back."

    Nope. Wouldn't work. If they didn't know, they'd try to guess. The guesses might even be worse than the reality.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  146. Re:How horrable! by tbannist · · Score: 1

    The group he objects to being associated with specifically discriminates against people who state anything that can be construed as critical towards peers when they belong to a "protected" group.

    Well that's just wrong. The CoC says you should be nice, and you can't criticize people for belonging to under represented groups. You can still constructively criticize work if it's done poorly.

    Until he may say something that could be construed as negative towards "protected" individuals.

    I see, since someone might get angry with him in the future for a bogus reason, so he's going to become a hermit. So wise.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  147. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by datavirtue · · Score: 1

    By forcing tension and ostrisizing people?

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  148. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Big by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    There speaks a clear expert on sex and sexuality.

  149. Re: SJWs Value Tech Only as a Tool to Spread Bigot by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

    No, being nice to each other by being nice to each other. It's funny that no-one ever answers the simple question "Which part of it do you disagree with?".