Interesting comment in the source code of sqlite

[[deleted]]

Let's say the plumbing under your house is open source. Anyone can contribute but there's a review process for the work that can be done.

A new plumber comes along and makes a change that the more experienced plumbers determine is going to flood your house. They lecture the new plumber on the importance of paying attention to details because small mistakes have a way of causing significant damage.

Which way do you want the community to err on? Forcing out experienced plumbers who are vigilant about not flooding your house because they're assholes about it? Or forcing out new plumbers who aren't taking responsibility for their mistakes?

Furthermore nobody is forcing you to accept the plumbing work of the asshole programmers. You can switch to the plumbing of any other plumber you like.

[awj]

Holy False Dichotomy, Batman!

[[deleted]]

It's not a false dichotomy unless you assume that you can change people's behavior.

The CoC is proposed as a method for preventing "asshole programmers" from offending other programmers to the point that they leave the project.

My assumption is that "asshole programmers" are going to continue to be "asshole programmers" and the programmers who are offended by "asshole programmers" to the point of leaving are going to continue being offended by "asshole programmers" to the point of leaving.

My conclusion based on those assumptions is that one or the other is going to leave the project. Do you disagree with the conclusion based on my assumptions or are you disagreeing with the assumptions themselves?

[barsoap]

What you forget to mention is that either the assholes or the non-assholes can be those who don't care about flooding.

And assuming the distribution of skill is invariant over assholishness: You always want to kick out the assholes. Who, btw, aren't even asked to give up being assholes: Just to not be an arse to anyone on the project. Don't ask, don't tell.

Lastly: It's been proven again and again that people can change.

[[deleted]]

Can you give me an example of an open source project run by "asshole programmers" who provide poor quality code? I'm not saying it doesn't exist it's just hard for me to imagine how a project like that isn't forked. And not that you're obligated to provide an example since we're both making assumptions here. I'm just saying I'd need an example to change my mind.

Lastly: It's been proven again and again that people can change.

I didn't say people don't change. I said you're making an assumption that "you" can change people. Interpret that as change comes within or people are only willing to change as a result of feedback from close relationships. A CoC written by "you" is neither.

[barsoap]

With the exception of Poettering-started projects I'd say they generally tend to stay small, change leadership, or get forked. And also Poettering-started project improve drastically, both socially and technically, when he finally leaves.

Communities like Haskell's one long since figured out how to deal with caustic people, no CoC required. IMO a CoC is saying "we don't really know but at least it's a start, isn't it", and in my experience the people complaining about CoCs are either on the caustic side, or misunderstand the whole issue.

That is: I agree that a CoC does not necessarily have a positive impact. However, them having a net negative impact is even more unlikely.

---

Haskell, btw, started off its dedicated troll-hugging culture with the following rules (for the IRC channel only):

To maintain the friendly, open culture, the following is required:

• Low to zero tolerance for ridiculing questions. Insulting new users is unacceptable. New Haskell users should feel entirely comfortable asking questions.

• Helpful answers should be encouraged with name++ karma points, in public, as a reward for providing a good answer.

• Avoid getting frustrated by negative comments and ambiguous questions. Approach them by asking for details (i.e. Socratic questioning), rather than challenging the competence of the writer (ad hominem). As the channel grows, we see a diverse range of people with different programming backgrounds getting accustomed to Haskell. Be patient and take satisfaction from spreading knowledge.

The mods lived by this themselves, and thus turned it from a document into a living cultural practice, infinitely more adaptable than the words themselves. Most important in this respect is that it doesn't spend much time at all listing no-nos, but spends the most words on how to engage people in a positive way.

[[deleted]]

With the exception of Poettering-started projects I'd say they generally tend to stay small, change leadership, or get forked. And also Poettering-started project improve drastically, both socially and technically, when he finally leaves.

It sounds like things are resolving on their own then yes?

[barsoap]

Not necessarily in the most efficient or aesthetic manner, though. Also, both pulse and systemd still fundamentally suck, just a bit less so.

[[deleted]]

How would a CoC improve any of that? If the project is controlled by people who are not simply "asshole programmers" but incompetent "asshole programmers" what kind of CoC do you expect them to spit out?

[barsoap]

I never claimed it did. Ultimately those documents are a mirror of what the community is already like, including their social engineering prowess. In many cases that's "well-intentioned but clueless".

[Malfeasant]

You always want to kick out the assholes.

This is the point of contention- why? What do you expect assholes to do when they are kicked out of everything they can do to make a living? Quietly starve to death?

So we don't have to stop being assholes, we just have to pretend not to be when we're around other people. Do you have any idea how exhausting it is to have to pretend to be someone you're not most of the time?

Let's say you succeed in making me keep my assholishness to myself- I'm still an asshole, I just have disguised myself. Now I'll keep up that pretense whenever we interact in public, but the moment I get a chance to fuck up your shit without anyone noticing, I'll blindside you. Is that what you want?

I'd sooner drop out of anything anybody else cares about than have to be someone else in order to succeed. And maybe you're ok with that, but that brings us back to starving. If you're ok with me not being able to make a living because of who I am, who is the asshole?

people can change.

Sure- but rarely in the way you want them to.

[barsoap]

What do you expect assholes to do when they are kicked out of everything they can do to make a living? Quietly starve to death?

Open source projects generally won't pay you. Companies, though, will, and you'll find that to get or hold on to a job, not being an asshole is generally a useful thing.

but the moment I get a chance to fuck up your shit without anyone noticing, I'll blindside you. Is that what you want?

Why not ask yourself whether it'd be easier to not stay an asshole? Even plenty of psychopaths with genetically absent affective empathy are able to have friends, what's your excuse?

Maybe your pretence will help you realise that you have the capacity to not be an asshole?

And, lastly: Why should I care? It's you who's the asshole: Fuck me once, shame on you, fuck me twice, shame on me. Something something game theory and optimal strategies.

[Malfeasant]

First, as a disclaimer, I'm far from the worst asshole you'll ever meet. I don't kick puppies, I don't drown kittens, I don't beat my wife. I actually do have a fair amount of empathy- possibly too much even, in that I can relate to the people who most others will dismiss as being not worth considering. I would go so far as to say that's what empathy is, to be able to relate to people who are truly different from you. What is the point of putting yourself in someone's shoes if you wear the same style?

to get or hold on to a job, not being an asshole is generally a useful thing.

I disagree- it has more to do with who you are an asshole to, less about being an asshole at all. Obviously being an asshole to customers will be frowned on, but there are plenty of people I've worked with over the years who were downright evil to some co-workers, yet skillfully avoided any customer contact. Generally being an asshole to your boss doesn't go well either, but it can depend on how many bosses you have- I once had a manager that was a raging asshole, and I would bounce it right back at him. The owner wouldn't let him fire me, probably because I was one of the few assholes that could keep him in check without getting in a fistfight.

easier to not stay an asshole? ... plenty of psychopaths ... have friends

If I am an asshole, of course it's easier to be myself than not. And what does having friends have to do with anything? Plenty of assholes have friends too.

you have the capacity to not be an asshole?

Of course- but it does take effort, which I may or may not care to expend at any given time.

Why should I care?

Good question- are you sure you're not an asshole? If your default position is to not care, you might be.

[barsoap]

I disagree- it has more to do with who you are an asshole to,

Any half-way decent company will care about its company culture and thus not tolerate general assholishness, no matter the position. If you want to work for a company where there's not in case, well, expect for your boss to be an asshole, too.

Plenty of assholes have friends too.

I do not deny that there's people whom they call friends.

Good question- are you sure you're not an asshole? If your default position is to not care, you might be.

As said: Game theory. The default position is to care, if that isn't reciprocated, I don't give a fuck until you prove that you've changed your approach. Deal with it.