[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 07:52:36 PDT 2016
I won't disagree about a level of professionalism or what the
community does or doesn't need. However, I'd say that pragmatically if
profanity was an issue in the workplace, for a large development
community, that LKML would have run afoul a long time ago.
My view -
I'm only replying because the reality is that in the workplace
sometimes a full lexicon of words are spoken. I really don't like
being censored just to coddle overly sensitive people. Context...
This big discussion is started, but how will it conclude - would
someone just take action.
I don't like Chanlder's wall of text, because it doesn't seem simple
enough - should I draft up an alternative for review? I'd highly favor
common sense and super simple
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Renato Golin via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> To: "C Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
>> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 7:44:25 AM
>> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct
>> On 5 May 2016 at 13:23, C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> wrote:
>> > 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.
>> > (context)
>> > https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
>> Excellent context!
>> > 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.
>> I don't care much about the swearing like "s***, I broke the bots
>> again", but I understand not everyone is like that, so I avoid to the
>> best of my abilities.
>> I can easily cope with "this code is a piece of s***", because
>> sometimes it really is. Some people take it personal, though, so it's
>> best if we all always avoid that kind of talk.
>> But there's nothing dubious about: "you are a piece of s*** for
>> writing this code". That is totally unacceptable.
> I'd strongly prefer that we have a "no public profanity" policy here. The fact that this community maintains a professional decorum is essential to being able to treat community interaction as an expected part of LLVM-related work activities. Otherwise, to name one problem, such expectations might run afoul of laws and regulations governing the workplace environment. Yes, some profanity is benign, but I see no definitive way to draw that line, and frankly, there are no situations where it is required.
>> Now, encoding this in the CoC is the hard part...
>> > 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..
>> That's another point I had forgotten.
>> I don't think the people in this committee should be nominated, but
>> voted. This is more than just the LLVM Foundation doing stuff on the
>> side, this is out whole community, of which the foundation is only
>> part of.
>> I feel very strongly about that, even if I trust the people that get
>> nominated. Others might not, and that'd be against the very code
>> trying to uphold.
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Hal Finkel
> Assistant Computational Scientist
> Leadership Computing Facility
> Argonne National Laboratory
More information about the llvm-dev