[llvm-dev] Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm

[Gleb Popov via llvm-dev]

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> What unmitigated bullshit. Your attempt at logic is laughable. You hold up
> threadbare stereotypes as the norm, when in reality they are little more
> than characters straight out of Central Casting. The "genius hermit who
> can't associate with people" is dumb and false. It's meant to excuse
> behavior that is unacceptable,
>

Where did you get that?

when in reality a person who cannot interact with people is emotionally
> stunted and not deserving of accolades.
>
> Please peddle your bullshit elsewhere.
>
> -bw
>
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Unnamed Poster via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Non-meritocratic technology and academic projects will be damned.
>>
>> This is a general response to Renato's response to Rafael's post, and
>> also to the media discussion sparked by this thread at
>> http://www.businessinsider.com/programmers-debate-requirements-to-behave-
>> respectfully-ccoc-2018-5 , continuation of this topic would need to be
>> moved off-list:
>>
>>
>> Any high complexity technology or academic project involvoing more people
>> needs to follow a meritocratic model to survive and thrive.
>>
>> In other words, within the project, your worth amounts to your past
>> contributions to the project and your present knowledge of all the
>> project's material technological and academic aspects.
>>
>> Last years, a stress has been put on parts of the open source community
>> to submit to an agenda that is not technologically or academically
>> motivated, but instead is "socially" motivated.
>>
>> What I see is that normally this ""social"" agenda reduces to the
>> cultural-marxist social control trick of coercing people to comply with
>> "the values", where "the values" may appear well-intended and "just"
>> through being codified in some written form, but in reality are arbitrary
>> and actually function as a control tool for parties that are not really
>> contributing to the project and who have no real preference for the
>> project's advancement whatsoever, but instead only want to prey on its good
>> name to boost their egoes.
>>
>> Attempts to formalize a social code for participating in an open source
>> project, where factors that are not related to project merit are included
>> such as sexuality, ideology and ethnicity, will by its nature cause a
>> competence exodus, and left will be the legacy of what the previous
>> productive participants did before they were scared away by the "social
>> conformists" who now dominate.
>>
>> Based on my own experience with many highest-competence software experts
>> in programming, software architecture and so on, I suggest that highly
>> qualified software people tend to have slightly unpolished personalities.
>> This may be primarily because these people's primary passion is to give all
>> their energy to bring progress to the technology and academic work, which
>> is an all-consuming task and leaves no energy-space left in a person to
>> develop traits such as being a drama queen, attention-seeking victim type,
>> or other type that would distract the project.
>>
>> This social dynamic is deep, where highly qualified people tend to be
>> less good at managing social circumstances and therefore prefer to leave,
>> while the less qualified people envy the performance of the more qualified,
>> and so the less qualified try to prey on the more qualified up to the point
>> that the project is socially bankrupt.
>>
>> The highly qualified people are in nature meritocrats because the tech
>> and academic details of the project is frequently the only thing they are
>> really fluent in, and any risk of being judged by any other standard than
>> material project merit would be felt as immensely offputting to them, and
>> so hence the competence exodus.
>>
>> For this reason I suggest that if you think you need a social code, it
>> reflects that you have less-competent people on board and likely in charge
>> already, and the project's best interest would be to not encourage their
>> participation and instead encourage the participation of those who provenly
>> do contribute.
>>
>> If you fail, and Rafael's leaving is a strong indicator that you are
>> quite far down that slope already, then I hope some group that is smarter
>> and better than you will fork your project and bring the world the
>> potentials lying in LLVM/Clang that your particular social circle failed at
>> providing.
>>
>> You will never be able to stick a social policy to a project where
>> technology and academic progress matters.
>>
>> If what you do would be contagious, you're also contributing to killing
>> any meaningful open forum ambitions in the open source community altogether.
>>
>>
>>
>> Extended version:
>>
>> If an open source project and the people who like to congregate on
>> conferences, are not attending based on merits quantified in code and
>> academic contributions, then the project is technically history and dead
>> and there is nothing of substance to confer about.
>>
>>
>> Rafael writes:
>> > Unfortunately the last few years haven't been the same. On the
>> > technical side llvm now feels far bigger and slower to change. There
>> > are many incomplete transitions. That, by itself, would not be
>> > sufficient reason to leave.
>>
>> This seems to be a case in point - LLVM used to be a focus of code and
>> academic process as in an interesting forum for technological and academic
>> work.
>>
>> Now that time has passed and what's left is "hot air", and people without
>> coding or academic edge can prey on LLVM's good name that was built up in
>> the past.
>>
>> It's not uncommon for merit-lacking participants to coerce the whole
>> extended group into compliance with their control, which enforces the
>> dead-shell model of the project as noone with tech or academic aspirations
>> possibly could find inspiration or space for real work in such an
>> environment.
>>
>> What would you better give your energy to, stay home/at the office in
>> peace to work on making the project better, or attend a conference where
>> some unkown lunatic could attack you for transgressing an irrelevant policy?
>>
>>
>> Rafael writes:
>> > The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice
>> > movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared
>> > about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just
>> > writing a good compiler framework.
>>
>> Renato writes:
>> > You'll see that this is not an LLVM trend, but a world wide trend and
>> > that's not a bad thing.
>>
>> Renato, you are not correct. By justifying this gunk you're drawing on
>> yourself big problems for you and others.
>>
>>
>> Rafael:
>> > It is, and I wholeheartedly agree, an exaggerated and poisonous trend,
>> > but it's a response to an even more poisonous history and one that
>> > needed a change.
>>
>> The poisonous history of working hard, with zero financial incentive or
>> gain, for the general public's benefit and for academic advancement, with
>> no guarantee whatsoever for success, and the freedom to discuss that
>> process with others who do the same?
>>
>> If this is your risk model then I suggest you exit open source, there are
>> plenty positions in politics for you.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > History is not stable, nor it's a steady progression. History happens
>> > in hiccups, step-function-like sudden increases in pressure, which are
>> > then followed by attenuated periodic function. This is one of them.
>>
>> This is hot air.
>>
>>
>> Rafael:
>> > Somewhat recently a code of conduct was adopted. It says that the
>> > community tries to welcome people of all "political belief". Except
>> > those whose political belief mean that they don't agree with the code
>> > of conduct. Since agreement is required to take part in the
>> > conferences, I am no longer able to attend.
>>
>> This is the control model of marxism and cultural marxism especially: You
>> end up with a doctrine saying that participants are required to comply with
>> "the values", to not be eliminated from participation.
>>
>> Normally noone has a copy of "the values", or at least it's clear in
>> practice that "the values" are effectively unwritten, and this creates the
>> perfect breeding ground for the community to be taken over and run by total
>> creeps.
>>
>> The de-facto discontinuance of any real progress or results will be of no
>> bother to them.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > I defended your point of view in the code of conduct, but I have come
>> > to accept what it is, not what it says. The code is just a statement
>> > and have not changed how we behave (I don't think you would ever be
>> > kicked out of a conference).
>>
>> The meritocratic creed is that any good useful code commit or paper that
>> is submitted should be reviewed and if found to advance the material
>> qualities of the project, be included.
>>
>> The function of a social environment is primarily to facilitate the
>> interaction between the people who are the most devoted to that
>> technological and academic work when and as they are doing exactly that.
>>
>> A possible second function of a social environment would be to provide
>> the time and space for meeting between those who know more or are more up
>> to date about the tech and academic progress and who want to give time to
>> sharing their insights, to those for who in earnest want to learn more
>> about it.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > What I could not change and still fear is the report policy, which
>> > leaves no room for the accused to defend itself, or even know it's
>> > been accused. But that's not a discussion for this thread.
>>
>> A report policy would reflect that your project has already failed, that
>> for some reason you are pulling drama queens and social profiteers already.
>> Such people have normally not done any good code or academic work in the
>> first place, as real work for creating progress and social drama are very
>> different forms of activity and normally a person who does one of those
>> will not be very good at the other.
>>
>> I have a hard time seeing someone who is proven world-leading in a
>> particular technology or academic discipline, at the same time give energy
>> to distract a community.
>>
>> In other words, intentionally or unintentionally you have recruited
>> suckers.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > However, the main point here is why we have it and who is doing it. I
>> > know Chandler and Tanya for a while and, while I do not speak for
>> > them, I trust them to *want* to do the right thing (tm).
>>
>> If they need political or sexual codes for their "LLVM" conference, wish
>> them good luck with their social charity and have fun with their social
>> distractions.
>>
>> At some point, some group of people who actually want a better compiler
>> and who want to work for it, will either fork LLVM to LLVN / LLVM2, or
>> start from scratch.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > If they miss the mark, or make mistakes, I'd first point out to them,
>> > not assume ill intent. This has been my personal experience and I have
>> > no reason to change behaviour.
>>
>> Again, if you lost grips of meritocracy so much in your tech-academic
>> project that you need ideological and sexual management, you are done and
>> over with already.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > However, the main point here is why we have it and who is doing it. I
>> > know Chandler and Tanya for a while and, while I do not speak for
>> > them, I trust them to *want* to do the right thing (tm).
>>
>> Social policies can be justified by beautifully-sounding, good intentions.
>>
>> Why don't we criminialize thought crimes, the world would be a better
>> place without unnice thoughts, wouldn't it.
>>
>> That particular persons have fallen prey for the temptation of censoring
>> a community according to principles that are irrelevant for the project,
>> does not mean they are faring with bad intentions.
>>
>> You seem to already have lost yourself in trying to define a
>> technology-academic project in social terms and hence gotten distracted
>> from focus on progress.
>>
>> Meanwhile, competent people intuitively feel really bad that their work
>> is preyed on as food for others' ego dramas that have been totally out of
>> the scope and intention of their work, and so you get competence exodus.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > For what it's worth, so far, I have found the LLVM community fair and
>> > just on how it treats its citizens, as I have myself fell foul from
>> > ill behaviour of other members and that has been solved decently and
>> > properly.
>>
>> A competent unnice person may be so as a way to emphasise to you that he
>> is doing you a free of charge favor by talking to you at all, and that it's
>> on your table to do homework.
>>
>> I suggest that a common quality among people who have real expertise,
>> have slightly edgy characters, as their energy has gone into the passion of
>> their interest rather than to polishing their social interaction skills.
>>
>> Noone is forcing you to spend time with them. You can run your own
>> Victims Anonymous or any other project you like, without them.
>>
>>
>> Reading, studying and testing sourcecode yourself at home may be for you.
>>
>> Meeting people who have accomplished stuff, is a privilege and not a
>> right.
>>
>>
>> Real transgression such as physical violence or physical harassment have
>> already been codified by applicable law and would be dealt with by the
>> police and courts, and do not need your extensions.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > It's really hard to find places that will fund developers, especially
>> > young ones and the ones that have no other opportunity. But we have to
>> > be careful with whom sponsors our devs and why.
>>
>> Who said anyone would fund you? You are your own.
>>
>> LLVM is a highly complex software project. If apart from paying the
>> smartest, best and most knowledgeable people you can find to bring LLVM
>> development work the highest practical value possible, you also want to
>> appoint some junior trainee in the hope that he'd learn quickly, then I
>> hope that you would not use that effort as a vehicle for a political e.g.
>> marxist agenda, you can obviously use it to rant unendingly about how good
>> you are, but it will not help the project or bring anything than unease to
>> those who are really devoted to its technological and academic advancement.
>>
>>
>> Renato:
>> > I truly believe the "fix" for this problem is: let's talk. Not here,
>> > this is the dev list, but let's create a place where we can discuss
>> > these things.
>>
>> If anyone who really would like to contribute code or academically to
>> LLVM has emotions that distract them from doing so, then sure as a separate
>> act of charity maybe someone can give some time to discuss and to bring
>> comfort to that person.
>>
>>
>> Participating in LLVM or any other interaction with others, is a
>> privilege and not a right.
>>
>> The act of committing world-class technology expertise into a project,
>> does not come with strings attached, such as an obligation to interact with
>> anyone for any reason.
>>
>> If you want to learn something and others don't want to share their
>> knowledge, then offer them something, for instance payment. If they don't
>> accept your price offer, then offer them a higher pay.
>>
>>
>> You will never be able to stick a social policy to a project where
>> technology and academic progress matters.
>>
>> I hope you are seeing the writing on the wall of this symbolic
>> death-throe for your project as one of your most accomplished developers
>> now has thrown in the towel.
>>
>> Based on what you write, your project is over.
>>
>>
>> If what you do would be contagious, you're also contributing to killing
>> any meaningful open forum ambitions in the open source community altogether.
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180507/ce870f75/attachment.html>