Code of Conduct now part of official repo.

xuanbao · · 471 次点击

这是一个分享于的资源，其中的信息可能已经有所发展或是发生改变。

It's not a popular topic, I know, but for those of you who care about shaping the future of the Go community, <a href="https://golang.org/design/13073-code-of-conduct" rel="nofollow">here</a> is the link. For those of you who don't care, please don't deny others the opportunity of participating (by downvoting the thread). <hr/>**评论：** inanotherworld: <pre>If you totally ignore the feedback from the community, then it's not a community code of conduct in my book.</pre>lkjhgfds2: <pre>This has been posted twice before. Once in a locked thread (by one of the authors / mods) where we weren't allowed to comment and again where it was torn to shreds due to being unfit for purpose: <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/golang/comments/3r2t63/proposed_code_of_conduct_for_the_go_project/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/golang/comments/3r2t63/proposed_code_of_conduct_for_the_go_project/</a></pre>lkjhgfds2: <pre>To expand, the proposed Code of Conduct is a combination of the Django and Rust Code of Conducts, however they've added a number of their own rules, which (surprise, surprise) are the ones that everyone is taking issue with.</pre>jim45804: <pre>Which rules did they add?</pre>lkjhgfds2: <pre>These two additions in particular received the most criticism: <blockquote> [Avoid destructive behavior, for example:] ... If someone takes issue with something you said or did, resist the urge to be defensive. Just stop doing what it was they complained about and apologize. ... “Microaggressions,” the small, subtle, often subconscious actions that marginalize people in oppressed groups. </blockquote> The example given from microaggressions suggests that we should never use "so simple even my grandma could understand it." as it marginalises woman and the elderly. Personally, I find that the whole document comes across as rather condescending and the tone reminds me of something that might be handed out to small children. To quote further: <blockquote> While a major goal of this proposal is to make the community more inclusive, this does by definition exclude people that cannot abide by the goals and principles of the code. I see this as a regrettable but necessary and inescapable design tradeoff. </blockquote> The proposition seems to literally be that you should be excluded from the community for saying something which could be taken as offensive by even the tiniest fraction of the community if you do not apologise and shut up. I'm all for a Code of Conduct, but not this one. The Django and Rust Code of Conducts are both great examples of good Codes of Conduct, and are incidentally both very similar. The proposed code of conduct would leave me in a position where I would feel unable to participate in the Go community because of it. </pre>adiabatic: <pre>I'm reading through the <a href="https://www.rust-lang.org/conduct.html" rel="nofollow">Rust one</a> now and it seems mostly similar. What makes it better than the Go one?</pre>lkjhgfds2: <pre>In general the Rust CoC, despite having a sentence or two that I personally would disagree with, is a lot more friendly, welcoming and encouraging. It's a guide HOW to be part of the community. The Go CoC is a guide on how to get yourself excluded unless you are entirely non-offensive (even in "small, subconscious" ways). For example, from the Rust CoC: <blockquote> Please be kind and courteous. There's no need to be mean or rude. Please keep unstructured critique to a minimum. If you have solid ideas you want to experiment with, make a fork and see how it works. </blockquote> These are both really welcoming statements, what to do, how to be part of the community. "Please" is a nice touch, and it comes across as friendly - the CoC is being used as an example of how to write something for the Rust community. I see it, and I feel like I can be a functioning part of the community. Then I look at the proposed Go one and see: <blockquote> Remember that sometimes it is best to refrain from commenting entirely. Avoid destructive behavior, for example: “Microaggressions,” the small, subtle, often subconscious actions that marginalize people in oppressed groups. </blockquote> It just comes across as unfriendly, unwelcoming, and puts me off being part of the community. I fee like the CoC is there to put people off joining the community rather than to welcome them. Words like "enforcement", "refrain" and phrases such as "This section states" are unfriendly, whilst the Rust CoC used "Moderation" and "These are the policies for upholding our community's standards" are much more friendly. This should be a guide for dealing with people - it should be written as such. Instead, it's written like a technical document as if people are machines. The Rust CoC contains one of the same lines that got a lot of complaints in the Go CoC: <blockquote> If someone takes issue with something you said or did, resist the urge to be defensive. Just stop doing what it was they complained about and apologize. </blockquote> However, the Rust CoC goes on to explain the policy: <blockquote> Even if you feel you were misinterpreted or unfairly accused, chances are good there was something you could've communicated better — remember that it's your responsibility to make your fellow Rustaceans comfortable. </blockquote> It changes the statement from "if someone complains, you are wrong and should apologise and shut up" to "perhaps there was a communication issue which could be worked on". Again, a small thing, but it makes the CoC a lot more friendly. The Rust CoC is also a good example of taking a (in my opinion) a terrible starting point (it's based on the <a href="http://blog.izs.me/post/30036893703/policy-on-trolling" rel="nofollow">Node.js Policy on Trolling</a>) and turning it into something which is welcoming. I'm not sure what's going on with the people who "run" the Go community at the moment. There's clearly a push for diversity, which is a very good thing, however diversity through exclusion is exactly the worst type of diversity.</pre>awaythrooo: <pre><blockquote> Avoid destructive behavior, for example: “Microaggressions,” the small, subtle, often subconscious actions that marginalize people in oppressed groups. </blockquote> I know the CoC supporters want to signal that the community is open for any contributor, but that type of stereotypical "Portlandia" language will be foreign and not welcoming to the rest of the world who is not part of that subculture. Many of these CoC seems to reflect current American neurosis about identity and do not translate well overseas. By trying to be "inclusive", it's actually very "exclusive" to a certain mode of thought.</pre>videogams: <pre><blockquote> "Romantic or sexual commentary, remarks, or questions." </blockquote> This is funny. As if Go is a male only boarding school.</pre>chickencheesebagel: <pre>Are you sure you don't want to lock this thread so it's easier to cram this piece of shit down the community's throat?</pre>SnowDaProduct: <pre><blockquote> community's throat </blockquote> I'm not a fan of the CoC either, but you don't get to speak for me. Get over yourself.</pre>nexusbees: <pre>He speaks for the majority of the people on Reddit. Just look at the previous 2 threads, one of which was locked and this thread. Perhaps he's not the one who needs to get over himself.</pre>velco: <pre>so I just looked at the 59 changesets committed after my last checkout on Nov 1st, and there's only one doc commit, unrelated to CoC.</pre>enneff: <pre>Misleading title. It's a proposal for a code of conduct, not part of the main repo. </pre>zzoid: <pre>Well if the gender studies nazis start targeting the tech community, and some in the tech community get brainwashed and involved, we end up with CoCs like this one.</pre>peterbourgon: <pre>Yay! Congrats to everyone involved.</pre>