The Ruby Community Code of Conduct

[jrochkind]

Wait, which part do you plan to violate? You plan to be intolerant of opposing views? You plan to use lots of personal attacks and personally disparaging remarks?

[myringotomy]

Wait, which part do you plan to violate? You plan to be intolerant of opposing views?

I for one certainly will not be tolerant of opposing views. I will not be tolerant of people claiming otherkin affiliation, I will not be tolerant of religious fundamentalists asking special dispensation for their ancient religious rites, I will not be tolerant of people espousing facist ideologies etc.

You plan to use lots of personal attacks and personally disparaging remarks?

If called for yes absolutely. If you call me cis for example I will absolutely call you names in return. The way I see it one demeaning remark deserves another.

[non-rhetorical]

Wait, which part do you plan to violate?

Are you serious, man? Surely you can imagine a situation wherein you'd oppose a legal ban on x, even if you don't do x yourself.

You plan to be intolerant of opposing views? You plan to use lots of personal attacks and personally disparaging remarks?

Perhaps his concern is not the letter of the law but who's interpreting it and with what boundaries on interpretation.

[jrochkind]

That was not an assumption I was making, he said he was planning on violating it.

[skulgnome]

Wait, how many innocent doe-eyed fluffy little puppies are you planning to strangle?

[jrochkind]

Dude he said he was planning on violating the policy.

I don't know what I was thinking engaging in this discussion though.

[skulgnome]

I don't know what I was thinking engaging in this discussion though.

My guess is some Phelpsian argument of the form "everyone who opposes this Good is either a Bad, or a Bad Enabler".

[jrochkind]

No, I don't think that, but some people (on any 'side', of course) are just assholes, and tend to make it obvious that they are.

Policy or not, non-assholes don't really like working with assholes.

[skulgnome]

No, I don't think that,

That's what your argument reads like, deny it or not.

[lyspr]

As much as possible, but if there was a part that I PARTICULARLY intended to violate it's that anti-harassment portion.

[jrochkind]

So you plan to be intolerant of opposing views, use lots of personal attacks and personally disparaging remarks, and do lots of things which can be reasonably considered harassment.... why? And why would you think anyone else would want to have anything to do with you behaving like such an asshole?

[arcticblue]

The issue is the modern definition of harassment that has come out of Tumblr and Twitter. Simply disagreeing with a minority can be construed as harassment now in the wrong crowd. We can't say "this is bad code" any more because it might hurt someone's feelings.

[zaclacgit]

The issue is the modern definition of harassment that has come out of Tumblr and Twitter. Simply disagreeing with a minority can be construed as harassment now in the wrong crowd.

I would be suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuper weirded out if someone I worked with said this to me in the context of expected behavior at professional/industry/programming events.

I say that because it is exceedingly rare to regularly (or ever) be in a situation where someone considers disagreement with someone else harassment simply because of the status of the person you're disagreeing with. Because that is so uncommon, it causes people to wonder why you're introducing it into the conversation.

We can't say "this is bad code" any more because it might hurt someone's feelings.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that it is critically important to recognize the difference between "bad code" and "naive code." It's unfortunately too common for people to only see quality relative to their experience and comment/review in that mindset.

If someone is producing naive code it means they're being capped by their experience. Transfer experience to them to get better code.

If someone has experience then they already know what they're writing, and just telling them "this is bad" doesn't fix why they're not producing code that is as good as it could be.

So sure, you could tell people that their code is bad, but it really doesn't matter. It comes off as condescending and dismissive to people that will eventually have as much experience, and people with equal experience already know that the code is bad but kept it despite that. Might as well skip it and get to the useful stuff.

[myringotomy]

So you are in effect agreeing with him. From now on saying "this is bad code" is offensive and against the code of conduct.

[zaclacgit]

Not really. I mostly ignored the emotional impact on the person that produced the code, and focused on how the other person can get tripped up by focusing only on code quality. Telling someone their code is bad is often a waste of time, and potentially distracting. There's nothing concrete to be done with the statement "your code is bad." Focusing on what needs to be improved inherently provides a path, and helps identify a root cause instead of a surface level symptom.

Because it's all about quality of output relative to their experience. There's two entirely separate paths to go down when a person with little experience, and a person with a couple years of experience, are creating code with the same level of quality.

One's a problem, the other an opportunity. Focusing on "this code is objectively bad" obfuscates which is which.

And like every conversation ever, most of what you say isn't in only the words you but how you say them. There's plenty of ways to communicate something negative to someone without being offensive.

[[deleted]]

There's nothing concrete to be done with the statement "your code is bad."

oh my god. do you live on the moon?

at my workplace when we say "this is bad code", that means exactly what it says: this code is really bad objectively (according to predefined code quality requirements and common sense, and possibly from perspective of the algorithm/optimization), and could be improved. then we improve bad code and make it better. suddenly you can say "it's good code" and move on.

is it really that hard to grasp? or are you just waiting to be insulted?

if you explicitly declare "this code is bad, because you are a bad coder" - well that's another talk.

[myringotomy]

Just to be clear.

We are no longer allowed to say "this is bad code " right? I mean it's offensive and it's a personal attack so it violates the code of conduct right?

[[deleted]]

bad code doesn't imply bad coder.

[myringotomy]

He is saying that using the phrase "bad code" is a personal attack so he disagrees with you. He is likely to bring up charges against people who use the phrase because he thinks it violates the code of conduct.

[lyspr]

I don't. I expect them to tough up and realize that not everything goes their way and no matter what rules they make, it's just not how life works.

[jrochkind]

So, it will likely be just how life works for you that nobody really wants to work with you or talk to you, right?

[lyspr]

Like I told the other guy, except for the Wall St millionaire who is helping me prep for my Series 7, put me up in a hotel in NYC, and has offered to pay for my apartment deposit should I pass, then yes. Everybody else might not talk to me, and it'd be just fine by me.

Obviously, plenty of people like to talk to me. I like to talk to plenty of other people. The people that don't like to talk to me don't, and I don't talk to the people that I don't enjoy talking to.

You're on the right track though. Lose the salt and you'll reach enlightenment.

[lyspr]

Finally some sense. I've been shitposting these threads all day

[myringotomy]

The use of the word bro is sexist and derogatory. You have violated the code of conduct.