Diseased Open Source Software Community - it's about ethics in Code of Conducts

[CrunkLord420]

Some FreeBSD package maintainers have dropped out due to the CoC. I'm not sure if anyone still cares at this point (let me know).

https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2018-February/112646.html

https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2018-February/112638.html

Benno Rice still sperging on twitter

Benno associates with Dan Olsen

 

[CIA Nigger]

Here's something a bit different from SJW drama: Troon programmers fucking up projects.

So the NPM (the node.js package manager) had an update, an update that broke something big. It started trashing people's permissions, and a bug report was opened, which led to both comments about how it broke their shit and a flamewar kicked off by a beta male calling everyone immature. Furthermore, it was a pre release version of nodejs being pushed as a stable release.

Here's the best summary of it all though for those who don't want to skim:

So, who pushed this update that broke everything? A troon.
https://archive.fo/hPhz7

https://archive.fo/py7wX

https://archive.fo/PcrWj

 

[Kazami Yuuka]

i've never been more put off from learning programming

Don't worry, this is only relatively common with "trendy" programming languages like NodeJS. Mainly because it's easy to contribute very little, but maintain a large presence. If you go the embedded systems development route (C and ASM), very rarely will you have to deal with that. Though, embedded systems is quite unforgiving.

 

[The Demon]

Don't worry, this is only relatively common with "trendy" programming languages like NodeJS. Mainly because it's easy to contribute very little, but maintain a large presence. If you go the embedded systems development route (C and ASM), very rarely will you have to deal with that. Though, embedded systems is quite unforgiving.

sounds okay. i guess i was just being a little bitch about it since i'm not really interested in programming anyway. besides, can't i just learn programming C and ASM on my own anyway?

 

[CrunkLord420]

Benno Rice did a video interview [timestamp 21:18]

• original code of conduct was a knee jerk response to GamerGate (or just around that time?)
• wanted to get rid of the "try not to get offended" aspect of the older CoC
• being offended is subjective, so all complaints go to them and they decide (not sure how this solves subjectivity)
• defends the concept of safe spaces
• too many white males
• CoC brings in hypothetical new people
• implies that trans people within the project lead the decision to adopt the Geek Feminism CoC
• denies adopting the political philosophy of Geek Feminism, and that the CoC should be viewed as just a starting point
• denies giving into the "PC SJW feminazis"
• confirms that FreeBSD contributors fall under the rules of the CoC, online and offline, everywhere.
• conduct team is intentionally diverse, sounds like they brought in non-contributors to be part of it? no names.
• FreeBSD is going to get (hire?) diversity trainers to teach the conduct team and core how to implement the CoC, despite this supposedly being their own creation.

More people leaving the project

 

[Pop-Tart]

Ain't got much to add but great thread @CrunkLord420, and everyone else. Most of this shit goes way over my fucking head, but I figured this thread could use a free bump for it.

 

[LH 909]

Enjoy all the annoyances of a job like mandatory sensitivity training from a HR diversity specialist while receiving none of the pay. Who wouldn’t want to contribute?

 

[Marvin]

Torvalds does need to be the benevolent dictator. It is necessary. If he wouldn't lay the hammer down occasionally, the Linux kernel would become a bloated, to-earlier-versions-incompatible mess inside of 0.5 seconds. All I've ever seen of him since the early 00s tells that he is a reasonable, practical person who doesn't sugar coat stuff. He also doesn't have the "holier than thou" attitude too many people in this industry have. He will actually go out of his way to explain things to people and is in fact very approachable. If he was wrong about something he also got no trouble admitting it. Thing is, he just isn't wrong that often. You see this with many people that are confident in their skillset. The people that are super defensive and need "safe spaces" regarding their work are usually that way because they know, deep down, that they are just not very good at what they do and have a fear of being found out.

I think Torvald's insane nonsense is probably a net positive for Linux. However, let's be real here, Linus Torvalds does indeed lose his shit and freak out at people unjustifiably. He's like a toddler. That's a reputation he has absolutely earned.

Programming and software development needs the practical skills and knowledge about certain techniques but also talent, just like drawing or writing. You either can or you can't, it is not something you really can learn through any formalized training. To make a comparison to writing, almost every person in a civilized country learns how to read and write. Does that mean all those people are able to be good authors and writers? Of course it doesn't. It's the same with programming. Learning the practical tools of the trade isn't hard, and in fact is easier now than it ever was before. Applying them, that's what parts the Unity asset gamedev from the kernel hacker.

I wouldn't say that. Programming is better compared to technical writing. It does involve a creative element, but unlike art or music, you can learn it. There are established standards for good style in technical writing. Be clear, arrange your writing in a step-by-step sorta layout, repeat yourself in a predictable manner, etc.

Of course, you do have to work at it. You need to practice. It's like with learning a new programming language. There are oodles of programmers out there who think that once they've learned the basic syntax and semantics of a new language (and I'm talking the barest details necessary to get the program to putter over the finish line), they think they don't need to practice or learn the native style of the language. Shit drives me up the wall.

I don't care if you're new at a language, that's fine, we've all been there. But you can't just stop. You've gotta practice.

I'm not sure if anyone still cares at this point (let me know).

Oh, I do. Shit's fascinating. Like, I've always heard rumors of drama in the software industry, but I've never experienced it myself.

Benno Rice still sperging on twitter

Heh, what does this guy do with his time? I can't believe he gets any programming done.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

The funniest thing about open source communities is that so many of them have products that are completely pointless and stupid.

 

[AF 802]

Here's something a bit different from SJW drama: Troon programmers fucking up projects.

So the NPM (the node.js package manager) had an update, an update that broke something big. It started trashing people's permissions, and a bug report was opened, which led to both comments about how it broke their shit and a flamewar kicked off by a beta male calling everyone immature. Furthermore, it was a pre release version of nodejs being pushed as a stable release.

View attachment 388543

Here's the best summary of it all though for those who don't want to skim:
View attachment 388549

So, who pushed this update that broke everything? A troon.
https://archive.fo/hPhz7
View attachment 388546
https://archive.fo/py7wX
View attachment 388553
https://archive.fo/PcrWj
View attachment 388554

I don't wanna code in Node anymore.

 

[AnOminous]

So, who pushed this update that broke everything? A troon.

Never trust troons with anything mission critical or even important. If you want some screaming and crying, call a troon.

 

[CrunkLord420]

Another FreeBSD package maintainer and committer has left the project, or at very least has given up ownership of his packages: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226157 (https://archive.fo/rJzUy)

Quick check of his twitter

And more, can't find any statement from pawel/vg (no real social media) or tabthorpe (hasn't said anything about FreeBSD recently on his twitter): https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/svnadmin/conf/access?view=log&sortby=rev&pathrev=462873 (https://archive.fo/NLWWK)

Misc shit talking of FreeBSD's security on the FreeBSD mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2018-February/009762.html (https://archive.fo/lINYy)
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2018-February/009763.html (https://archive.fo/YaNAA)

 

[Kosher Dill]

Another FreeBSD package maintainer and committer has left the project, or at very least has given up ownership of his packages:

For those who aren't in the open source scene - how big a deal is this? How important are maintainers?

 

[CIA Nigger]

For those who aren't in the open source scene - how big a deal is this? How important are maintainers?

They keep packages "up to date", along with ensuring nothing conflicts and adding in packages. People leaving roles in open source projects is something you commonly see when a project is unhealthy, along with forks being made.

 

[CrunkLord420]

For those who aren't in the open spurs scene - how big a deal is this? How important are maintainers?

The core of pretty much any modern UNIX-like distribution is the package manager, it's the big distinction, especially between Linux distros (which FreeBSD is not). Packages are maintained by volunteers, if there are not enough volunteers packages get dropped, or possibly even worse are never updated and become security risks. If there are no packages in your package manager, it devalues your distribution. Users can still download source and compile it on their own, but this is a manual process, especially keeping something up to date.

In a normal distribution a package maintainer leaving isn't a big deal, it'd be like if a mod left KiwiFarms. The issue is when you don't have a lot of package maintainers to begin with, having even less becomes a bigger and bigger deal. According to their own stats they have 29893 packages. In contrast Debian has 68798 packages in it's stable branch alone. These stats might seem high, but they're not. A single piece of software can consist dozens of packages. Their Haskell compiler/lib category has over 500 packages alone.

double posting for unrelated spergy

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

double posting for unrelated spergy

That guy sure puts a lot of effort into what kind of computer he uses

 

[AnOminous]

They keep packages "up to date", along with ensuring nothing conflicts and adding in packages. People leaving roles in open source projects is something you commonly see when a project is unhealthy, along with forks being made.

You don't get more unhealthy than Stage 4 cancer, and that's what this kind of SJW bullshit is.

They want to shit all over those eeeebil demonic white males, but still have them around to do all the actual work.

Fuck them.

Just rename it TrannyBSD and watch as the project collapses.

 

[CrunkLord420]

Trustico, an SSL reseller, may have just destroyed their business. Here's a twitter thread to summarize so I don't have to: https://twitter.com/geofft/status/968937746214596610 (https://archive.fo/rC0g8)

https://www.trustico.com/news/2018/symantec-revocation/certificate-replacement.php (https://archive.fo/0AnyR)

Spoiler: Trustico damage control

Symantec® Replacement & Revocation

As a reseller we follow the guidelines and agreements that both DigiCert & Symantec® had entered into with us.

We had been in contact with DigiCert several times over the past week to inform them that we no longer authorised them to hold our active SSL Certificates on their platform. We believe the orders placed via our Symantec® account were at risk and were poorly managed. In good conscience we decided it wasn't ideal to have any active SSL Certificates on the Symantec® systems, nor any that didn't meet our stringent security requirements.

Our concerns also relate to the upcoming distrust of all Symantec® SSL Certificate brands within Google Chrome.

According to the Symantec® Subscriber Agreement provided during the ordering process and within the Symantec® website, we believed that we were required as the reseller to perform a revocation request for any SSL Certificate whereby trust was questionable :

"IF YOU IS A CUSTOMER OF A RESELLER (AS DEFINED HEREIN), SUBSCRIBER REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS THAT IT AUTHORIZES SUCH RESELLER TO APPLY FOR, ACCEPT, INSTALL, MAINTAIN, RENEW, AND, IF NECESSARY, REVOKE THE CERTIFICATE ON SUBSCRIBER’S BEHALF."

At no time did we believe that we had compromised any private keys, though at the request of DigiCert we provided the Private Keys to them in order to facilitate a revocation request :

Mike Johnson of DigiCert sent an e-mail to us advising the following :

"If subscribers request revocation (and we are able to authenticate that the revocation request is truly from the subscriber, such as by the subscriber delivering the private key), we follow the revocation timelines set forth in the BRs."

Further, Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert sent an e-mail to us requesting the following :

"Can you please send a listing of the certificate serial numbers along with their private keys? Once we get that list, we’ll confirm the private key and revoke the certs as requested. Thanks!"

Trustico® followed the requests of DigiCert by initially recovering Private Keys from cold storage and subsequently e-mailing the associated order number and Private Keys to DigiCert in a ZIP file. The file did not contain any other type of data.

Trustico® allows customers to generate a Certificate Signing Request and Private Key during the ordering process. These Private Keys are stored in cold storage, for the purpose of revocation.

In our view it is absolutely critical that an SSL Certificate performs its intended function. In accordance with CAB Forum guidelines we acted to immediately revoke active SSL Certificates whereby trust was questionable.

Unfortunately things didn't go very well for us today and we are extremely sorry for all the confusion and inconvenience that has been caused. We believed that we had acted in accordance with the agreements and information that both DigiCert and Symantec® had imposed and provided upon us.

https://www.digicert.com/blog/digicert-statement-trustico-certificate-revocation/ (https://archive.fo/zXzw9)

https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/80uaq3/digicert_certificates_being_revoked/ (https://archive.fo/NBR6X)

Email to a customer

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/mozilla.dev.security.policy/wxX4Yv0E3Mk (https://archive.fo/nm5yT)

Spoiler: Trustico responds on mozilla.dev.security.policy

Jeremy,

Today many of our customers experienced lengthy delays when attempting to contact us via phone, e-mail and live chat. The reason for the delays were due to an unexpected e-mail that DigiCert sent to our customers containing some inaccurate information. We were not informed that the e-mail would be sent and were caught by surprise. We had disabled this e-mail within your control panel and opted to send our own notices, though you took it upon yourselves to send my personal details to 20,000 customers.

We didn't authorise DigiCert to contact our customers and we didn't approve the content of their e-mail. At no time had any private keys been compromised, nor had we ever informed to you that any private keys had been compromised. During our many discussions over the past week we put it to you that we believe Symantec to have operated our account in a manner whereby it had been compromised. Your usage of the word compromise has been twisted by you to your benefit and is absolutely defamatory.

We believe the orders placed via our Symantec account were at risk and were poorly managed. We have been questioning Symantec without response as to concerning items for about a year. Symantec simply ignored our concerns and appeared to bury them under the next issue that arose.

There are a range of issues that Trustico intends to investigate via legal means.

In good conscience we decided it wasn't ideal to have any active SSL Certificates on the Symantec systems, nor any that didn't meet our stringent security requirements. Our concerns also relate to the upcoming distrust of all Symantec SSL Certificate brands within Google Chrome and the reasoning behind it. The same management team responsible for that situation is duly employed at DigiCert and are fully managing our account, causing grave concern on our part as it appears to be business as usual with a new name. We were also a victim whereby Symantec mis-issued SSL Certificates owned by us, subsequently we were asked to keep the matter quiet, under a confidentially notice.

We had implemented a system to ensure that all customers would receive a replacement SSL Certificate, though today it had failed to perform this function.

In our view it is absolutely critical that an SSL Certificate performs its intended function. Symantec's issue with Google appeared to seal that deal, whereby they will all eventually fail due to distrust. In accordance with CAB Forum guidelines we acted to immediately revoke active SSL Certificates whereby trust was questionable.

Trustico absolutely distrusts the Symantec brand due to the issues that forced Symantec into having to hand over its entire authentication business to an alternate CA and a range of issues beforehand. Though, Symantec was ultimately acquired by DigiCert - though now DigiCert appears to be influenced by the Symantec management team - that to date still is managing our account. Trustico stopped offering the Symantec brands early February after a meeting with your Symantec management team, whereby they had disclosed to us that various reckless issues had occurred (recording available).

We realize that this mass revocation is bothersome and time consuming for all that have been affected. We're working to contact all customers to get orders replaced as priority and working through a backlog of enquiries.

Unfortunately, things didn't go very well for us today and we are extremely sorry for all the confusion and inconvenience that has been caused. We were relying on systems that would easily replace and issue SSL Certificates automatically, though that didn't occur and we ended up in quite a mess. DigiCert didn't work with us to understand the issues and resolve them, we felt we were at a dead end.

We'll be following up again shortly with an update surrounding what occurred and more information about where we experienced failures. In the meantime, our staff are concentrating on getting SSL Certificates issued as quickly as possible from a reputable and trusted CA.

As for the question of who is the subscriber, well ultimately that came down to the agreement that we had made with you and the agreement on the website. The conditions of the subscriber agreement were not honoured by you when it came to our requests anyway – so it’s hard to comment on who you refer to be a subscriber – even though your subscriber agreement clearly states that the reseller is the subscriber in our case. We instigated revocation of SSL Certificates as per your subscriber agreement.

I shall like to further note that DigiCert terminated our contract on Sunday 25th February immediately after we put to you that we intended to seek a legal opinion in respect to the operation of our account and security concerns.

Jeremy, the evidence that we have at hand as per the issues surrounding the revocation is somewhat different to what you are disclosing here today. As one of Symantec's former largest partners - my personal opinion and personal experience is that Symantec is a company that thrives on recklessness and one that I wouldn't trust nor deal with.

Zane Lucas

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...e-ssl-certificates-in-trustico-digicert-spat/ (https://archive.fo/isvzM)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16485801 (https://archive.fo/p3RIZ)

PS. nearly every URL in this post was already archived before I submitted them, good job nerds.

 

[CrunkLord420]

RED ALERT
The internal developer FreeBSD mailing list concerning the Code of Conduct has been leaked. I am in the process of reviewing it for choice content. Uploading it now in standard mbox format (zipped). You can view it with a text editor, or with a email client (like mutt -f <filename>) to parse out the ugliness.

Spoiler: preview of email subjects

1 O Feb 12 Benno Rice ( 57) New Code of Conduct
2 Os Feb 13 Greg 'groggy' L ( 64) Re: New Code of Conduct
3 O Feb 12 Pedro Giffuni ( 82) Re: New Code of Conduct
4 O Feb 12 Devin Teske ( 65) Re: New Code of Conduct
5 O Feb 12 Pedro Giffuni ( 121) Re: New Code of Conduct
6 O Feb 12 Devin Teske ( 141) Re: New Code of Conduct
7 O Feb 12 Adam Weinberger ( 73) Re: New Code of Conduct
8 O Feb 12 Pedro Giffuni ( 230) Re: New Code of Conduct
9 O Feb 12 Warner Losh ( 13 Re: New Code of Conduct
10 O Feb 13 Pedro Giffuni ( 105) Re: New Code of Conduct
11 O Feb 13 Poul-Henning Ka ( 42) Re: New Code of Conduct
12 Os Feb 13 DutchDaemon - F ( 85) Re: New Code of Conduct
13 O Feb 13 Warner Losh ( 119) Re: New Code of Conduct
14 Os Feb 13 Bryan Drewery ( 132) Re: New Code of Conduct
15 O Feb 13 Pedro Giffuni ( 103) Re: New Code of Conduct
16 Os Feb 13 Brooks Davis ( 45) Re: New Code of Conduct
17 O Feb 13 Warner Losh ( 47) Re: New Code of Conduct
18 O Feb 13 Benno Rice ( 97) Re: New Code of Conduct
19 Os Feb 13 Bryan Drewery ( 86) Re: New Code of Conduct
20 O Feb 13 Benno Rice ( 53) Re: New Code of Conduct
21 O Feb 13 Warner Losh ( 142) Re: New Code of Conduct
22 O Feb 13 Ian Lepore ( 36) Re: New Code of Conduct
23 O Feb 13 Devin Teske ( 160) Re: New Code of Conduct
24 O Feb 13 Pedro Giffuni ( 12) Re: New Code of Conduct
25 O Feb 14 Alexey Dokuchae ( 19) Re: New Code of Conduct
26 O Feb 14 Warner Losh ( 59) Re: New Code of Conduct
27 O Feb 14 Marcelo Araujo ( 97) Re: New Code of Conduct
28 O Feb 14 Ian Lepore ( 39) Re: New Code of Conduct
29 O Feb 15 Dag-Erling Smør ( 42) Re: New Code of Conduct
30 O Feb 14 Pedro Giffuni ( 47) Re: New Code of Conduct
31 O Feb 14 Adrian Chadd ( 19) Re: New Code of Conduct
32 Os Feb 15 Adriaan de Groo ( 4 Re: New Code of Conduct (glossary)
33 O Feb 15 Adrian Chadd ( 31) Re: New Code of Conduct (glossary)
34 O Feb 15 Colin Percival ( 30) Re: New Code of Conduct (glossary)
35 Os Feb 15 DutchDaemon - F ( 72) Re: New Code of Conduct
36 Os Feb 15 Remko Lodder ( 121) Re: New Code of Conduct
37 Os Feb 15 Remko Lodder ( 151) Re: New Code of Conduct
38 O Feb 15 Ollivier Robert ( 22) Re: New Code of Conduct
39 O Feb 15 Yuri ( 82) Re: New Code of Conduct
40 Os Feb 15 Sean Bruno ( 106) Re: New Code of Conduct
41 O Feb 15 Alonso Cárdenas ( 179) Re: New Code of Conduct
42 O Feb 15 Warner Losh ( 200) Re: New Code of Conduct
43 O Feb 15 Pedro Giffuni ( 124) Re: New Code of Conduct
44 O Feb 15 Devin Teske ( 86) Re: New Code of Conduct
45 O Feb 15 Alonso Cárdenas ( 253) Re: New Code of Conduct
46 O Feb 15 Mark Linimon ( 20) Re: New Code of Conduct
47 O Feb 15 Mark Linimon ( 14) Re: New Code of Conduct
48 O Feb 15 Ian Lepore ( 39) Re: New Code of Conduct
49 O Feb 15 Kurt Jaeger ( 25) Re: New Code of Conduct
50 O Feb 15 Devin Teske ( 141) Re: New Code of Conduct
51 O Feb 15 Justin Hibbits ( 36) Re: New Code of Conduct
52 O Feb 15 Ian Lepore ( 32) Re: New Code of Conduct
53 O Feb 15 Kurt Jaeger ( 1 Re: New Code of Conduct
54 O Feb 16 John Pinkman ( 19) FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
55 O Feb 15 Adam Weinberger ( 34) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
56 O Feb 16 Dag-Erling Smør ( 19) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
57 O Feb 15 Warner Losh ( 51) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
58 O Feb 15 Conrad Meyer ( 26) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
59 O Feb 16 Michael Gmelin ( 56) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
60 O Feb 16 Dag-Erling Smør ( 20) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
61 O Feb 16 Dag-Erling Smør ( 27) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
62 O Feb 15 Warner Losh ( 73) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
63 O Feb 15 Mark Linimon ( 10) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
64 O Feb 16 Michael Gmelin ( 126) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
65 O Feb 15 Rodney W. Grime ( 26) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
66 Os Feb 15 David Wolfskill ( 66) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
67 O Feb 15 Rodney W. Grime ( 37) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
68 O Feb 15 Rodney W. Grime ( 40) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
69 Os Feb 15 David Wolfskill ( 8 Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
70 O Feb 15 Conrad Meyer ( 35) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
71 O Feb 16 Jan Beich ( 2 Re: New Code of Conduct
72 O Feb 15 Yuri ( 22) Re: New Code of Conduct
73 O Feb 15 Conrad Meyer ( 1 Re: New Code of Conduct
74 O Feb 15 Yuri ( 1 Re: New Code of Conduct
75 Os Feb 16 DutchDaemon - F (1129) Re: New Code of Conduct
76 Os Feb 16 DutchDaemon - F ( 6 Re: New Code of Conduct
77 O Feb 16 David Thiel ( 16) Re: New Code of Conduct
78 Os Feb 17 Adriaan de Groo ( 231) Re: New Code of Conduct
79 O Feb 17 Colin Percival ( 23) Re: New Code of Conduct
80 Os Feb 18 DutchDaemon - F ( 550) Re: New Code of Conduct
81 O Feb 18 Devin Teske ( 27) Re: New Code of Conduct
82 O Feb 19 Julian Elischer ( 59) Re: New Code of Conduct
83 O Feb 18 Benno Rice ( 384) Re: New Code of Conduct
84 O Feb 19 Julian Elischer ( 177) Re: New Code of Conduct
85 O Feb 18 Devin Teske ( 212) Re: New Code of Conduct
86 O Feb 19 Garance A Drose ( 53) Re: FreeBSD new CoC is garbage
87 O Feb 22 Veniamin Gvozdi ( 3 Drop commit bit
88 O Feb 22 Maxim Konovalov ( 32) Re: Drop commit bit
89 O Feb 22 Yuri ( 34) Re: Drop commit bit
90 O Feb 23 Julian Elischer ( 29) Re: Drop commit bit
91 O Feb 23 Marcelo Araujo ( 116) Re: Drop commit bit
92 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 61) Re: Drop commit bit
93 O Feb 23 Colin Percival ( 23) Re: Drop commit bit
94 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 25) Re: Drop commit bit
95 O Feb 23 Kurt Jaeger ( 30) Re: Drop commit bit
96 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 34) Re: Drop commit bit
97 O Feb 23 Kurt Jaeger ( 40) Re: Drop commit bit
98 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 42) Re: Drop commit bit
99 O Feb 23 Vsevolod Stakho ( 45) Re: Drop commit bit
100 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 26) Re: Drop commit bit
101 O Feb 23 Kurt Jaeger ( 17) Re: Drop commit bit
102 O Feb 23 Vsevolod Stakho ( 23) Re: Drop commit bit
103 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 66) Re: Drop commit bit
104 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 52) Re: Drop commit bit
105 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 26) Re: Drop commit bit
106 O Feb 23 Vsevolod Stakho ( 32) Re: Drop commit bit
107 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 32) Re: Drop commit bit
108 Os Feb 23 Roman Bogorodsk ( 60) Re: Drop commit bit
109 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 2 Re: Drop commit bit
110 O Feb 23 Kurt Jaeger ( 23) Re: Drop commit bit
111 Os Feb 23 Matthew Seaman ( 93) Re: Drop commit bit
112 O Feb 23 Warner Losh ( 59) Re: Drop commit bit
113 O Feb 23 Pedro Giffuni ( 39) Re: Drop commit bit
114 Os Feb 23 Roman Bogorodsk ( 103) Re: Drop commit bit
115 O Feb 23 Warner Losh ( 50) Re: Drop commit bit
116 Os Feb 23 Roman Bogorodsk ( 61) Re: Drop commit bit
117 O Feb 23 Dan Langille ( 56) Re: Drop commit bit
118 O Feb 23 Pedro Giffuni ( 139) Re: Drop commit bit
119 O Feb 23 Devin Teske ( 14 Re: Drop commit bit
120 O Feb 23 Devin Teske ( 26) Re: Drop commit bit
121 O Feb 23 Benno Rice ( 56) Re: Drop commit bit
122 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 34) Re: Drop commit bit
123 O Feb 23 Warner Losh ( 111) Re: Drop commit bit
124 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 60) Re: Drop commit bit
125 Os Feb 23 Kirill Ponomare ( 59) Re: Drop commit bit
126 O Feb 23 Warner Losh ( 16 Re: Drop commit bit
127 Os Feb 23 Brooks Davis ( 65) Re: Drop commit bit
128 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 44) Re: Drop commit bit
129 O Feb 23 Benno Rice ( 57) Re: Drop commit bit
130 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 31) Re: Drop commit bit
131 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 31) Re: Drop commit bit
132 O Feb 23 Cy Schubert ( 94) Re: Drop commit bit
133 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 30) Re: Drop commit bit
134 O Feb 23 Nathan Whitehor ( 81) Re: Drop commit bit
135 O Feb 23 Poul-Henning Ka ( 31) Re: Drop commit bit
136 O Feb 23 Alonso Cárdenas ( 7 Re: Drop commit bit
137 Os Feb 23 Adriaan de Groo ( 59) Re: Drop commit bit (a stick to beat core@ with)
138 Os Feb 23 Adriaan de Groo ( 76) Re: Drop commit bit (on paraphrases)
139 O Feb 23 Marko Zec ( 106) Re: Drop commit bit
140 O Feb 23 Adrian Chadd ( 17) Re: Drop commit bit
141 O Feb 24 Poul-Henning Ka ( 2 Re: Drop commit bit (a stick to beat core@ with)
142 Os Feb 24 Adriaan de Groo ( 259) Re: Drop commit bit (on the KDE CoC)
143 O Feb 23 Warner Losh ( 51) Re: Drop commit bit (a stick to beat core@ with)
144 O Feb 23 George Neville- ( 57) And now, a few words from core@ about the CoC
145 Os Feb 24 Roman Bogorodsk ( 90) Re: Drop commit bit
146 Os Feb 24 Roman Bogorodsk ( 85) Re: Drop commit bit
147 O Feb 25 Jeff Roberson ( 47) CoC discussion
148 O Feb 26 Dag-Erling Smør ( 1 Re: Drop commit bit
149 O Feb 26 Dag-Erling Smør ( 19) Re: Drop commit bit
150 O Feb 26 Warner Losh ( 46) Re: CoC discussion
151 O Feb 26 Poul-Henning Ka ( 40) Re: CoC discussion
152 O Feb 26 Alexander Motin ( 25) Re: Drop commit bit
153 O Feb 26 Marcelo Araujo ( 115) Re: CoC discussion
154 O Feb 26 Juli Mallett ( 423) Re: Drop commit bit
155 O Feb 26 Cy Schubert ( 582) RE: Drop commit bit
156 O Feb 26 Cy Schubert ( 582) RE: Drop commit bit
157 O Feb 26 Poul-Henning Ka ( 21) Re: Drop commit bit
158 O Feb 27 Tilman Keskinöz ( 30) Re: Drop commit bit
159 O Feb 26 Adrian Chadd ( 43) Re: Drop commit bit
160 O Feb 27 Eugene Grosbein ( 1 Re: Drop commit bit
161 O Feb 27 Ruslan Makhmatk ( 52) Re: Drop commit bit
162 O Feb 27 Poul-Henning Ka ( 34) Re: Drop commit bit
163 O Feb 27 Marcelo Araujo ( 131) Re: Drop commit bit
164 O Feb 27 Poul-Henning Ka ( 44) Re: Drop commit bit
165 O Feb 27 David Chisnall ( 62) Re: Drop commit bit
166 O Feb 27 Marcelo Araujo ( 135) Re: Drop commit bit
167 O Feb 27 Poul-Henning Ka ( 3 Re: Drop commit bit
168 O Feb 27 Bartłomiej Rutk ( 40) Re: Drop commit bit
169 O Feb 27 Marcelo Araujo ( 113) Re: Drop commit bit
170 O Feb 27 Dan Langille ( 66) Re: Drop commit bit
171 O Feb 27 Rodrigo Osorio ( 229) Re: Drop commit bit
172 Feb 27 Marcelo Araujo ( 274) Re: Drop commit bit
173 O Feb 27 Rodney W. Grime ( 94) Re: Drop commit bit
174 O Feb 27 Jeff Roberson ( 52) Re: Drop commit bit
175 O Feb 27 Warner Losh ( 52) Re: Drop commit bit
176 O Feb 27 Jeff Roberson ( 70) Re: Drop commit bit
177 O Feb 27 Poul-Henning Ka ( 33) Re: Drop commit bit
178 O Feb 27 Jeff Roberson ( 69) Re: Drop commit bit
179 O Feb 28 Julian Elischer ( 27) Re: Drop commit bit
180 O Feb 27 Adrian Chadd ( 59) Re: Drop commit bit
181 O Feb 27 Warner Losh ( 39) Re: Drop commit bit
182 O Feb 28 Eugene Grosbein ( 49) Re: Drop commit bit
183 O Feb 27 Marcelo Araujo ( 72) Re: Drop commit bit
184 O Feb 27 Garrett Wollman ( 27) Re: Drop commit bit
185 O Feb 28 Eugene Grosbein ( 36) Re: Drop commit bit
186 O Feb 27 Jeff Roberson ( 61) Re: Drop commit bit
187 O Feb 28 Dag-Erling Smør ( 30) Re: Drop commit bit
188 O Feb 28 Justin Hibbits ( 77) Re: Drop commit bit
189 O Feb 28 Warner Losh ( 7 Re: Drop commit bit
190 O Feb 28 Kurt Jaeger ( 86) Re: Drop commit bit
191 O Feb 28 Jonathan Anders ( 20) Re: Drop commit bit
192 O Feb 28 Cy Schubert ( 31) Re: Drop commit bit
193 O Feb 28 Devin Teske ( 4 Re: Drop commit bit
194 O Mar 01 Marcelo Araujo ( 184) Re: Drop commit bit
195 O Mar 01 Marcelo Araujo ( 223) Re: Drop commit bit
196 O Feb 28 Adam Weinberger ( 93) Re: Drop commit bit
197 O Mar 01 Colin Percival ( 44) Re: Drop commit bit
198 O Mar 01 Mark Linimon ( 13) Re: Drop commit bit
199 O Mar 01 Dag-Erling Smør ( 27) Re: Drop commit bit
200 O Mar 01 Marko Zec ( 30) Re: Drop commit bit
201 O Mar 01 Devin Teske ( 21) Re: Drop commit bit

Spoiler: Message 1 for context, also lol Benno using Apple Mail

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:50:55 -0800
From: Benno Rice <benno@FreeBSD.org>
To: FreeBSD Developers <developers@freebsd.org>
Subject: New Code of Conduct
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)

Hello all,

It’s taken far too long but we have a new Code of Conduct. This is the product of a lot of work behind the scenes from many people. It is my, and core’s, hope that this will provide a framework for how
+we as a project interact with each other and the rest of the world.

The code can be found here:

https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html

This is not intended to be a strict, black and white set of rules. It’s a set of principles that guide how we interact. Given that interaction is what allows the project to be more than the sum of its parts it is vital that this interaction be respectful and considerate. The FreeBSD project needs to be a place where people can come to learn and develop as well as to contribute and the way we achieve this is by holding ourselves to a clearly stated and well enforced code of conduct.

If you feel that someone has behaved inappropriately we have a mailing list, conduct@freebsd.org, that you can report this behavior to. Reports can be anonymous and will always be reviewed. If the CoC review team decides that action is required then actions ranging from simple communication with the person or people involved through to more serious consequences can be undertaken. If CoC review team decisions are felt to be inappropriate then they can be appealed to the Core Team.

The inaugural Code of Conduct review team is:

Li-Wen Hsu
Warner Losh
Juli Mallett
Benno Rice
Steve Wills

I’d also like to acknowledge the assistance of those who helped put this together:

Valerie Aurora
Anne Dickison
Warner Losh
Colin Percival
Devin Teske
Robert Watson

If you have any questions, feel free to ask here, contact Core directly or myself personally.

Thanks,
Benno (for core).
--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

Spoiler: Message 3, also Apple Mail

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:15:15 -0500
From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>
To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Benno Rice <benno@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Developers <developers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: New Code of Conduct
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)



> On Feb 12, 2018, at 20:29, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
> On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 12:50:55 -0800, Benno Rice wrote:
>>
>> It???s taken far too long but we have a new Code of Conduct. This is
>> the product of a lot of work behind the scenes from many people. It
>> is my, and core???s, hope that this will provide a framework for how
>> we as a project interact with each other and the rest of the world.
>>
>> The code can be found here:
>>
>> https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html
>
>
>
> As I've told you privately, I don't object to the content, but it's a
> sad sign of the times that people think that we need a code of conduct
> in the first place. And, like source licenses, there are far too many
> of them.
>

FWIW, and this is just IMHO, the previous Code of Conduct was better and appeared more sensible by appealing to common sense (which admittedly is the least common of senses and may be open to
+interpretation).

This one is sort of a ruleset of what not to do. It does have an educational angle: the concept of a “dead name” is something I find rather weird. Subject A changed name (and perhaps also gender) and now
+wants to be called B, but is now ashamed of being called A. Ah well .. no one wants a colleague to be ashamed for his/her past, but setting a rule about it is rather extreme.

Sensitivities are different in other geographical areas I guess, so perhaps its just better to avoid talking at all to people that seem they may have a "dead name”, that way we avoid any accident that
+may trigger the sensitivity problem altogether. And there the Code of Conduct is a good excuse for isolating some people.


>> This is not intended to be a strict, black and white set of rules.
>
> That's the best thing about it.
>

I will be happy if its the last time it is discussed. I think it’s fine to have a code of conduct but we can’t be constantly updating a list of nasty behaviours (which is why I preferred the common sense approach).

Cheers,

Pedro.

Spoiler: Message 18, Benno Rice

Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 10:50:01 -0800
From: Benno Rice <benno@jeamland.net>
To: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Developers <developers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: New Code of Conduct
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)



> On Feb 13, 2018, at 10:28 AM, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

[…]

> The point is/was: you can't really expect to have a set of rules that apply strictly to all cultures unless you want your Code of Conduct to have about the same size of the Old Testament, and even then
+something will be controversial.


We know that cultures are different. We know that what’s offensive to one person is inoffensive to others. We’re not stupid. A lot of thought went into this exercise.

The point is that you may not find something offensive and your friends may not find it offensive but the fact that you _know_ that some people find it offensive is a pretty good flag that you shouldn’t
+use it. The point is that the onus is on everyone to try not to offend people as much as possible. If offense happens the CoC team can help deal with it, through mediation if appropriate and sanction if
+not. If you’re concerned about how this will work I would encourage you to let it play out for a bit.

The intent is not to beat people up for the slightest mistake. The intent is to provide a statement as to how we intend to treat each other so that when people breach that they can be told that it wasn’t
+cool. If someone continues to engage in behaviour that is against the CoC that’s when things get more serious, especially if it becomes clear that the behaviour is intentional.

If you have constructive suggestions to make regarding either the CoC itself or the processes around it then please let us know otherwise please let this drop.

Thanks,
Benno.

Spoiler: Message 41

Hi

I have read CoC and It left me a sense that FreeBSD Project is being
aligned to ideologies of some things like "Politically Correct" wave or
impulsing some kind of agenda like I see it in my country. In Perú, we are
fighting for avoid that implant these kind of ideologies impulsing for
people of extreme left of Parlament ((If some of this list not know, we
life some years infect of terrorist attacks in my country. Everything
impulsing by extreme left people). They use same phrase/ideas like I read
into of CoC.

IMHO, I think that if this project is not involved into some kind of
politic or ideology things, we always found a better way to do that people
understand about respect between us.

Greetings
ACM

Spoiler: Message 121, Benno Rice

Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:09:02 -0800
From: Benno Rice <benno@jeamland.net>
To: Veniamin Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>
Cc: FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, portmgr@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)



> On Feb 22, 2018, at 3:40 AM, Veniamin Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> FreeBSD is more care about SJW than resolving conflicts. I stopped doing anything and visiting events after conflicts with bsdgirl.
>
> I hope new CoC will help project to grow up membership and write more quality code than keep in mind relations between members.
>
> Thank you members who was helping me to solve issues. Happy to see you in real life without strange restriction by CoC. Please keep my vg@ account, i might get back on board in future.
>
> - Veniamin

Hi Veniamin,

I apologise for not replying to this sooner and for all the noise that’s followed it. The new CoC is structured to be much better suited to resolving interpersonal conflicts than the one that preceded
+it. It protects you exactly as much as it protects everyone else and all it requires in return is that you not abuse or harass others as well as doing your best not to offend them. Other interpretations
+are going around that are misinterpretations and don’t represent what we intend to do with the Code, particularly any that involve us “banning” anything.

A project of any size or age needs to have at least some kind of policy like this to deal with conflicts when they arise, because it is a “when” and not an “if”.

I would encourage you, and anyone else who is concerned about how the CoC may affect them, to talk to myself, core@ or conduct@ to clarify things. It would be a shame if we let someone else’s
+interpretation of our policies lead to unnecessary divisions in the project, especially when the people who developed it and are implementing it are right here to answer questions.

I’d also encourage everyone to go and re-read my response to Adriaan de Groot from around February 18 as it contains a detailed discussion on why the CoC is the way it is and why it’s important that it is that way.

Thanks, and apologies again for the slow response,
Benno.
--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

Spoiler: Message 129, Benno Rice

Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:28:13 -0800
From: Benno Rice <benno@jeamland.net>
To: Marko Zec <zec@fer.hr>
Cc: FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)



> On Feb 23, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Marko Zec <zec@fer.hr> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:09:02 -0800
> Benno Rice <benno@jeamland.net> wrote:
> ....
>> I’d also encourage everyone to go and re-read my response to Adriaan
>> de Groot from around February 18 as it contains a detailed discussion
>> on why the CoC is the way it is...
>
> I'll bite it, amazed / ashamed that noone reacted on Feb 18th, given
> that you spoke with your core-hat on. In your note, in a tone which
> clearly wasn't sarcastic at all, you singled-out a specific group based
> not only on race / ethnic origin but also on sexual inclination as the
> root of worldwide "systematic oppresion".

I said that they had advantages. I didn’t say that this meant they were, by default, guilty of oppression. The point of noting the advantages is purely to note that people with them may end up unaware of
+them and that this can colour the way they interact with others. The CoC protects you, me and everyone else involved equally. To do that it needs to acknowledge the reality that there are inequalities
+in the world and ensure that it’s not merely continuing those. If you feel that the new CoC doesn’t protect you in the same way it protects other people in any meaningful way then please let me know.

If you want to argue whether these advantages exist or not I’d suggest having that argument somewhere else. I’m on IRC if you want to find me there.

> Acts like yours are liable to public prosecution and punishable by
> criminal law in most EU countries, but I doubt you weren't aware of
> that. This is not a joke: in my country people swiftly end up behind
> bars for comments like yours on FB or Twitter on a weekly basis, not
> based on civil prosecution, but due to police AI bots scrutinizing
> social network traffic, and most probably, plaintext e-mail as well.
>
> My point is that in defending the new CoC you and a few others have
> crossed the line which your CoC solemnizes as uncrossable.

If you truly believe that I’ve acted in the way you describe, please report me to conduct@ and I’ll recuse myself from the discussion and accept whatever response they decide is appropriate. I am subject
+to the CoC as much as everyone else.

Thanks,
Benno.
--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

Spoiler: Message 167, FUCKING WHITE MALES

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:59:01 +0000
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To: araujo@freebsd.org, Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com>
cc: Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <rm@freebsd.org>, Juli Mallett <juli@northcloak.com>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Veniamin
Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports Management Team <portmgr@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit

--------
In message <CAOfEmZj2kZ1LxX5KBzUVogRWDTcdr=amZWU-maXseNe9o8uukA@mail.gmail.com>, Marcelo Araujo writes:

>In this case, as we have power to vote for Core Team, we should have
>enough power to down something they did and not everybody is happy with
>that.

We dont.

One third of the committers can demand an early core election and that's it.

That would take 125 committers and so far I have not seen more than
a handful of committers whine about loosing their male white
privileges.

And before you start wasting everybodys time with a petition:

Please notice that 2018 is already a core-election year.

Poul-Henning

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

Spoiler: Message 168

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:07:07 +0000
From: Bartłomiej Rutkowski <robak@FreeBSD.org>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: araujo@freebsd.org, Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com>, Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <rm@freebsd.org>, Juli Mallett <juli@northcloak.com>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smørgrav
<des@des.no>, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Veniamin Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports Management Team <portmgr@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)



> On 27 Feb 2018, at 11:59, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
>
> --------
> In message <CAOfEmZj2kZ1LxX5KBzUVogRWDTcdr=amZWU-maXseNe9o8uukA@mail.gmail.com>, Marcelo Araujo writes:
>
>> In this case, as we have power to vote for Core Team, we should have
>> enough power to down something they did and not everybody is happy with
>> that.
>
> We dont.
>
> One third of the committers can demand an early core election and that's it.
>
> That would take 125 committers and so far I have not seen more than
> a handful of committers whine about loosing their male white
> privileges.

I’ve stayed away from this conversation but what I hate about this whole thing (the CoC, the New CoC, this discussion and arguments from both sides) is this exact language you’ve just used. You have just realised all the fears people opposing the CoC in one short sentence. I didn't expect that from you.

Kind regards,
Bartek Rutkowski


--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

Spoiler: Message 169, parsing is misleading so just the relevant bit

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:14:53 -0500
From: Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Marcelo Araujo <araujo@freebsd.org>, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov <rm@freebsd.org>, Juli Mallett <juli@northcloak.com>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>, Julian Elischer
<julian@freebsd.org>, Veniamin Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports Management Team <portmgr@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit

I'm not white male, I'm Latino if we need talk about color and race.

Spoiler: Message 171, latino isn't a race

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:58:21 +0100
From: Rodrigo Osorio <rodrigo@osorio.me>
To: araujo@freebsd.org, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov <rm@freebsd.org>, Juli Mallett <juli@northcloak.com>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Veniamin
Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports Management Team <portmgr@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0

On 02/27/18 14:14, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 27, 2018 6:59 PM, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk
> <mailto:phk@phk.freebsd.dk>> wrote:
>
> --------
> In message
> <CAOfEmZj2kZ1LxX5KBzUVogRWDTcdr=amZWU-maXseNe9o8uukA@mail.gmail.com
> <mailto:amZWU-maXseNe9o8uukA@mail.gmail.com>>, Marcelo Araujo writes:
>
> >In this case, as we have power to vote for Core Team, we should have
> >enough power to down something they did and not everybody is
> happy with
> >that.
>
> We dont.
>
> One third of the committers can demand an early core election and
> that's it.
>
> That would take 125 committers and so far I have not seen more than
> a handful of committers whine about loosing their male white
> privileges.
>
>
> I'm not white male, I'm Latino if we need talk about color and race.

What ? No, please, latino is neither a race nor a color,
and I do not think arguing this way will take you anywhere.

The term "male white privileges" is probably a poor choice,
but I assure you, this CoC thing is definitely not about color
and nationalities.

Talking about bad choices, genetic researches show that the
term "races" is a non-sense, if not a problematic term, when
talking about human beings.

Cheers,
- rodrigo

Spoiler: Message 187, SJWs come up

Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 11:50:34 +0100
From: Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
Cc: Veniamin Gvozdikov <vg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD developers <developers@freebsd.org>, portmgr@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Drop commit bit
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (berkeley-unix)

Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> writes:
> > Do you realize that the term “SJW”, when used unironically, is
> > intended as an insult?
> Yes and are YOU into throwing SJW around? I'm not into it.. The
> whole area is pretty boring unless you USE SJW or are the person being
> talked about.

OK, that makes no sense at all. It is clear that you don't know what
“social justice warrior” means. The term was originally coined within
the social justice movement to describe people who “talk the talk but do
not walk the walk”, or who behave as caricatures of the movement. It is
now used (almost) exclusively by those who oppose social justice to
ridicule and belittle those who fight for it. Unironic use of the term
is a clear indicator that you are on the wrong side of history.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no

--
This mail is for the internal use of the FreeBSD project committers,
and as such is private. This mail may not be published or forwarded
outside the FreeBSD committers' group or disclosed to other unauthorised
parties without the explicit permission of the author(s).

This shit just goes on and on.

 

[LH 909]

Can someone more in tune with node sum up the result of their CoC drama? I assume people just live with it now.