November 14, 2018 at 7:31 pm
Hugo Kornelis - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:54 PMstevescanlan - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 12:03 PMSteve Jones - SSC Editor - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 10:39 AMNot at all. However, the law doesn't cover all behavior. There are behaviors that an event or private company may not allow that are not illegal under the law.
The problem with Codes of Conduct is that they immediately head to Social Justice Warriorland and come out with statements on Climate Change or various positions on human sexuality. The relentless do-gooders and virtue signalers start pressing for more and more.
We're not talking about climate change or any other political issues here. We are talking about creating a welcoming environment where everyone can feel safe. You know, that whole #SQLFamily thing that everyone alsways is so excited about.
The law is not enough for that. The law does not forbid me to follow you around an entire evening. The law does not forbid me to look at you in any which way I want. Heck, the law does not even forbid me to make statements such as "oh if I ever had a chance I would so love to kick you where it hurts / give you an intinmate massage / make you do a million pushups / whatever else". There's nothing that a legal approach can do - but if I make such statements and then continue to follow you around, stay awkwardly close to you, perhaps even follow you to your hotel room ... would you fee safe?
The law is not always enough.
The Linux code of conduct was pretty politically charged which was interesting to me on a sociological level, you would think it should look like an HR document and have about the same effect. By the time I read all the rants the thing inspired however, I'd burned through a few bushels of popcorn, and I'm pretty thankful that I instead work with guidelines from a REGULAR HR department.
I suspect that discussing WHY the document raised objections would also be offtopic in this thread for good reason but I think anybody reading the Linux CoC and some of the resulting discussions can plainly see the links to Western political and cultural divisions.
November 14, 2018 at 7:50 pm
Hugo Kornelis - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:54 PMstevescanlan - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 12:03 PMSteve Jones - SSC Editor - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 10:39 AMNot at all. However, the law doesn't cover all behavior. There are behaviors that an event or private company may not allow that are not illegal under the law.
The problem with Codes of Conduct is that they immediately head to Social Justice Warriorland and come out with statements on Climate Change or various positions on human sexuality. The relentless do-gooders and virtue signalers start pressing for more and more.
We're not talking about climate change or any other political issues here. We are talking about creating a welcoming environment where everyone can feel safe. You know, that whole #SQLFamily thing that everyone alsways is so excited about.
The law is not enough for that. The law does not forbid me to follow you around an entire evening. The law does not forbid me to look at you in any which way I want. Heck, the law does not even forbid me to make statements such as "oh if I ever had a chance I would so love to kick you where it hurts / give you an intinmate massage / make you do a million pushups / whatever else". There's nothing that a legal approach can do - but if I make such statements and then continue to follow you around, stay awkwardly close to you, perhaps even follow you to your hotel room ... would you fee safe?
The law is not always enough.
"We're not talking about climate change or any other political issues here"
Just a matter of time. I don't care about a welcoming environment. I am here for the code.
November 15, 2018 at 3:52 am
patrickmcginnis59 10839 - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 7:31 PMThe Linux code of conduct was pretty politically charged which was interesting to me on a sociological level, you would think it should look like an HR document and have about the same effect. By the time I read all the rants the thing inspired however, I'd burned through a few bushels of popcorn, and I'm pretty thankful that I instead work with guidelines from a REGULAR HR department.
I suspect that discussing WHY the document raised objections would also be offtopic in this thread for good reason but I think anybody reading the Linux CoC and some of the resulting discussions can plainly see the links to Western political and cultural divisions.
WHAT?? I read the Linux CoC. It is nothing but a slightly longer version of Wheaton's Law. Nothing political about that. Just basic values of human interaction.
I did not read the discussion but seeing that we were unable to discuss this topic for 20 posts without people dragging bringing in climate change and Kavenaugh for no reason at all, I will gladly believe that the same happened on the Linux discussion platforms. But if you read -actually read!- the Linux CoC, you will see that there is nothing political in there. Just the rule to be respectful of others even if you disagree on things.
So no, I do not see any links to Western political and cultural divisions. I just see a set of rules stating what in my opinion should not even need stating - but apparently there are people in the Linux world -and reading Steve's post in our world as well- that are doing exactly what Wheaton's Law is telling them not to and that hence necessitate making official rules for this.
November 15, 2018 at 3:57 am
stevescanlan - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 7:50 PM"We're not talking about climate change or any other political issues here"
Just a matter of time. I don't care about a welcoming environment. I am here for the code.
No, not just a matter of time. A matter of choice. People can choose to drag politics into a discussion on human interaction or they can choose not to deflect from the actual discussion. Once done, others can choose to engage in that discussion or they can choose to stay away from it. My choice is clear.
"I don't care about a welcoming environment" - good for you. I don't mind. As long as you act well-behaved and civil enough so that you don't ruin the experience for the people that DO care about a welcoming environment.
If you do, however, then I hope that the forum rules are phrased such that you (not you specifically, anyone that makes the environment un-welcoming and un-safe) can be banned. And that Steve and other moderators do not hesitate to actually enforce those rules.
November 15, 2018 at 7:20 am
Hugo Kornelis - Thursday, November 15, 2018 3:57 AMNo, not just a matter of time. A matter of choice. People can choose to drag politics into a discussion on human interaction or they can choose not to deflect from the actual discussion. Once done, others can choose to engage in that discussion or they can choose to stay away from it. My choice is clear."I don't care about a welcoming environment" - good for you. I don't mind. As long as you act well-behaved and civil enough so that you don't ruin the experience for the people that DO care about a welcoming environment.
If you do, however, then I hope that the forum rules are phrased such that you (not you specifically, anyone that makes the environment un-welcoming and un-safe) can be banned. And that Steve and other moderators do not hesitate to actually enforce those rules.
Well, I'm going to offer one more thing and then I'm finished here. My neighbor, a well-respected local businessman stated it this way: "Your boss and your coworkers are not necessarily your friends. Earn your money and go home." This whole discussion rings pretty hollow to me. It seems fairly obvious that the idea of what constitutes proper interaction is based on the historic Judeo-Christian religious philosophy, which now so many have rejected and as a result are attempting to replace with this artificial 'code'.
At one point in my career I spent eleven years as IT manager for a large business co-owned by four members of a family and with about 150 employees. My immediate boss was extremely aggressive and vocal, and several times a week would find something to come to my office to scream and shout so loud the whole company office stopped to listen. Incidentally, the company did not have any 'HR' people, so there was no one to complain to.
There was absolutely no room for 'snowflakes' there. I guess the deal was, if I wanted to work there, I had to handle it. And I did. I never got it to the point that he wouldn't regularly throw his 'hissy-fits', but when he learned that I was strong enough to handle it, it might last a few minutes and then we would go to the break room together for coffee.
I guess my parting point here is that your work environment should be what YOU make it, and if you don't like it, get the -you-know what- OUT. This is most likely why I don't really sympathize with most of the issues in this discussion. Yeah, I that old geezer who earlier above was invited to die. That's OK. I can handle it.
Rick
Disaster Recovery = Backup ( Backup ( Your Backup ) )
November 15, 2018 at 7:40 am
Hugo Kornelis - Thursday, November 15, 2018 3:52 AMpatrickmcginnis59 10839 - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 7:31 PMThe Linux code of conduct was pretty politically charged which was interesting to me on a sociological level, you would think it should look like an HR document and have about the same effect. By the time I read all the rants the thing inspired however, I'd burned through a few bushels of popcorn, and I'm pretty thankful that I instead work with guidelines from a REGULAR HR department.
I suspect that discussing WHY the document raised objections would also be offtopic in this thread for good reason but I think anybody reading the Linux CoC and some of the resulting discussions can plainly see the links to Western political and cultural divisions.
WHAT?? I read the Linux CoC. It is nothing but a slightly longer version of Wheaton's Law. Nothing political about that. Just basic values of human interaction.
I did not read the discussion but seeing that we were unable to discuss this topic for 20 posts without people dragging bringing in climate change and Kavenaugh for no reason at all, I will gladly believe that the same happened on the Linux discussion platforms. But if you read -actually read!- the Linux CoC, you will see that there is nothing political in there. Just the rule to be respectful of others even if you disagree on things.
So no, I do not see any links to Western political and cultural divisions. I just see a set of rules stating what in my opinion should not even need stating - but apparently there are people in the Linux world -and reading Steve's post in our world as well- that are doing exactly what Wheaton's Law is telling them not to and that hence necessitate making official rules for this.
Explaining the objections would be off topic, sorry, besides, in this case ignorance is bliss LOL
November 15, 2018 at 8:04 am
Good point. Privately owned company, boss decides how they want to handle it. Staff decide whether they stay.
Goes for this forum too. Steve runs it. Steve makes it clear, in his editorial, that he wants to run this site to be friendly, welcoming, safe, and inclusive. I applaud the decision and decide to stay.
November 15, 2018 at 8:12 am
Lynn Pettis - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:20 PMskeleton567 - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 1:01 PMLynn, no argument that it isn't up to them, of and by themselves, but I contend that the responsibility is shared. I'm very weary of men, although I've not experienced it myself, always being ASSUMED to the the ones at fault.By the way,I would have voted to confirm Cavanaugh! I raised four sons - successfully - and always counselled them in their context that if they didn't want to be assumed guilty, then don't BE THERE. I think the same goes for women.
If you don't want customers, quit advertising.
I would have confirmed Judge Kavanaugh as well. Bringing up an accusation 36 years after the fact and with no supporting evidence was a smear.
During testimony Judge Kavanaugh was childish, immature, petulant, and evasive. Those are not the qualities that we want in a Supreme Court Justice, and he should have been disqualified on that basis alone.
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
November 15, 2018 at 8:33 am
I think we could use more folks with an IT background in the political legislature to balance and counterpoint the usual career politicians, activists, and businessmen. Those of us in IT (generally speaking) approach things from a logical perspective, deconstructing the issue and asking the right questions.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
November 15, 2018 at 8:36 am
drew.allen - Thursday, November 15, 2018 8:12 AMLynn Pettis - Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:20 PMI would have confirmed Judge Kavanaugh as well. Bringing up an accusation 36 years after the fact and with no supporting evidence was a smear.During testimony Judge Kavanaugh was childish, immature, petulant, and evasive. Those are not the qualities that we want in a Supreme Court Justice, and he should have been disqualified on that basis alone.
Drew
Wow, you really DID drink the Kool-Aid (and I was around for the event that originated that phrase). I watched nearly every minute of the hearings live, and that is NOT what I witnessed. As I have said, an idealist sees what they believe. A realist believes what they see.
Seems to me that about half of the committee, were in fact not living up to the standard of behavior that you are espousing regarding treating others with dignity and respect, and you are holding THAT up as an example?
Rick
Disaster Recovery = Backup ( Backup ( Your Backup ) )
November 15, 2018 at 8:48 am
If you are saying that women need to be mindful of how they dress and and act, I have to disagree.
I'm really cautious about this. I certainly don't want to victim blame and as far as I'm concerned a woman should have the right to dress however the heck she wants without fear of harassment. However, I do worry that a fear of being seen to victim blame can lead us to give out bad advice.
If the question is "Should a woman have the right to dress however she wants?", my answer is a hearty Hell Yes. But if the question is "Should this woman put on hot pants and a crop top and walk through the seediest part of town late at night?", well then I'm going to say it's not a good idea.
It's not about assigning responsibility or blame to the victim, if a woman (or anyone else, for that matter) is attacked the blame lies 100% with the attacker. But the moral high-ground will offer cold comfort when an attack happens and common sense says take reasonable steps to protect yourself and not invite a situation. The world has bad people in it and moral righteousness, sadly, offers no protection from them.
November 15, 2018 at 8:53 am
Eric M Russell - Thursday, November 15, 2018 8:33 AMI think we could use more folks with an IT background in the political legislature to balance and counterpoint the usual career politicians, activists, and businessmen. Those of us in IT (generally speaking) approach things from a logical perspective, deconstructing the issue and asking the right questions.
Eric, that is exactly why I, for one, would never survive in the political climate. I've been called lots of things, but PC ain't one of them, as everyone on here can plainly see. It's what makes life fun! Gee, if I couldn't jerk a chain now and then, I'd be lost and bored to death.
Rick
Disaster Recovery = Backup ( Backup ( Your Backup ) )
November 15, 2018 at 9:12 am
Sadly, you are right. There are, as you call it, seedy parts in some towns that are not safe. Not for women in hot pants, and not for me in an ugly Christmas swaeter.
I consider that a sign of failur of human society. It's not something that can be easily fixed, but if it ever gets fixed it'll have to come from government / politics.
But for the context of this discussion, I'll do whatever I can to ensure that places such as PASS Summit, or this forum, never degenerate into the level of, again quoting you, the seediest part of town. I hope all of us can be better than that.
November 15, 2018 at 9:19 am
skeleton567 - Thursday, November 15, 2018 8:53 AMEric M Russell - Thursday, November 15, 2018 8:33 AMI think we could use more folks with an IT background in the political legislature to balance and counterpoint the usual career politicians, activists, and businessmen. Those of us in IT (generally speaking) approach things from a logical perspective, deconstructing the issue and asking the right questions.Eric, that is exactly why I, for one, would never survive in the political climate. I've been called lots of things, but PC ain't one of them, as everyone on here can plainly see. It's what makes life fun! Gee, if I couldn't jerk a chain now and then, I'd be lost and bored to death.
And besides, with IT people as politicians, we'd be able to plug the holes, and then certain people would no longer be able to whine about Russian collusion hacking our elections.
Rick
Disaster Recovery = Backup ( Backup ( Your Backup ) )
November 15, 2018 at 9:31 am
Hugo Kornelis - Thursday, November 15, 2018 9:12 AMSadly, you are right. There are, as you call it, seedy parts in some towns that are not safe. Not for women in hot pants, and not for me in an ugly Christmas swaeter.
I consider that a sign of failur of human society. It's not something that can be easily fixed, but if it ever gets fixed it'll have to come from government / politics.But for the context of this discussion, I'll do whatever I can to ensure that places such as PASS Summit, or this forum, never degenerate into the level of, again quoting you, the seediest part of town. I hope all of us can be better than that.
Hugo, just wear the damn sweater and be PC. If the hot pants are OK, then your sweater is too. I'm pretty sure the government/politicians aren't going to get the problem fixed any sooner than, ...uh...er..., it's gonna get fixed on here.
Rick
Disaster Recovery = Backup ( Backup ( Your Backup ) )
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 49 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply