[llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct
C Bergström via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu May 5 05:23:18 PDT 2016
Is it so simple though?
For example - I generally find a minimal or moderate amount of
profanity be both acceptable and actually useful from time to time. On
a mailing list there's a ton of context and tone lost, but on a
youtube post or podcast you have a bit extra.. in person there's also
If I flip off someone, which is typically considered some level of
moderately offensive, in the LLVM community - what then?
Is the list PG, PG-13, R or at what level do "we" adults all consider
"ok". Even on broadcast tv (in the US) you'll hear some profanity.
Some people have pointed out that they don't like the R-rated style of
the LKML. Profanity and no holds barred just isn't for some people. I
can respect that, but personally I find it more funny and raw/honest.
What I'm trying to say - define offensive.. it will probably all come
down to a "reasonable person who is part of the community" - a noobie
could roll in and drop some 4 letter words and mean no harm.. that
could be on irc or the mailing list or... someone would probably let
him know what the community expects in that circumstance.. We don't
need to point him at some complicated *** wall of text describing blah
So using myself as an example - Above I censored myself, but any
reasonable person could probably figure out which word I meant...
Since David's my friend I'll pick on him for a minute - David C. I
think you're a F**** m*** f*****er - Should he be offended or do we
play a complicated game of guess what I meant.
Things not yet covered so far.... and this is super difficult to articulate...
On the list exists one person whom is an excellent engineer (not me),
but he sometimes comes across just on the left side of being a bully
(I hope not me). Never crossing the line - his attitude comes really
close, but probably never crosses the line of being pushy(guilty).
I've seen only a handful of people actually stand up against him,
because mostly his technical stuff is great and spot on. IMHO we just
all be a little bit tough and NO_ACTION_REQUIRED. With some written
policy in place - I could see this person then having to maybe hold
back his very valuable feedback, because sometimes you just have to
fight for it.. Pretty please don't restrict passionate people - when
you love something, you passionately need to defend it at times..
Sincere intentions, but strong words..
I've given examples of why a complicated and extensive approach may
fail. To try to turn this into something constructive. I really hope
for something super super simple.. (KISS)
In the world there exists arbitrators/moderators - Why not define a
couple of "adults" who have demonstrated a history of strong and
reasonable character. People who can defuse situations and basically
be the guy which "we" trust to make good decisions. Elect 3 -
something pops up... we go to them to make a decision or help fix
stuff. It's low volume so shouldn't be a burden.. they would likely
help out anyway..
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 5 May 2016 at 12:42, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
>> I'm against the ownership of firearms, and go at great lengths and
>> poorly choosing words in a discussion, which some could consider rude,
>> with person X about it. I know person X for decades and have earned
>> the right to offend him/her personally as they know I don't mean it
>> (could be a joke, and internal one even). This is a very strong
>> cultural point in many countries, including Brazil. The stronger two
>> people can offend each other and shrug, the stronger their bond is.
> Just for the sake of completeness, there are four main cases:
> 1. I interact with X outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
> part in this whatsoever.
> 2. I interact with Y outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
> part in this whatsoever.
> 3. I interact with Y outside LLVM, *about* their ability to perform as
> an LLVM developer, Y gets offended. The code *may* have something to
> do about it, but as you say, the sanctions *have* to be *way* less
> 4. I interact with Y inside LLVM, Y gets offended. That's what the
> code is all about.
> Makes sense?
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
More information about the llvm-dev