Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #12238 > unrolled thread

Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board]

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2021-04-06 22:50 +0200
    Diversity in an international project Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> - 2021-04-07 19:00 +0200
      Re: Diversity in an international project Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2021-04-07 20:00 +0200
      This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-04-07 20:00 +0200
        Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 17:40 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 18:10 +0200
            Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> - 2021-04-09 19:20 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Gilles Filippini <pini@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 18:10 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Roger Shimizu <rogershimizu@gmail.com> - 2021-04-09 18:50 +0200
          When is a political view too strong to be compatible with Debian Participation Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 19:00 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> - 2021-04-09 19:30 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 19:40 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 20:20 +0200
            Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Iustin Pop <iustin@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 21:20 +0200
            Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> - 2021-04-10 00:00 +0200
              Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2021-04-10 00:20 +0200
                Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2021-04-10 00:30 +0200
                  Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-04-10 10:00 +0200
              Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-04-10 18:20 +0200
          Re: Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is not the direction that will lead to hearing each other] Iustin Pop <iustin@debian.org> - 2021-04-09 21:20 +0200
    Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2021-04-07 21:50 +0200
      Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de> - 2021-04-11 02:20 +0200
        Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2021-04-11 03:20 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Geert Stappers <stappers@debian.org> - 2021-04-11 09:20 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-04-11 13:10 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de> - 2021-04-11 15:20 +0200
        Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 15:20 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 15:30 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 16:00 +0200
            Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 17:10 +0200
              Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 18:50 +0200
                Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 20:30 +0200
          Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] "Thaddeus H. Black" <thb@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 17:50 +0200
            Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2021-04-12 18:30 +0200
              Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2021-04-12 19:20 +0200
              Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 19:20 +0200
                Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2021-04-13 22:30 +0200
                  Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> - 2021-04-14 09:30 +0200
                  Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-04-15 15:40 +0200
            Re: Tone policing by a member of the community team [Was, Re: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board] Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2021-04-12 20:20 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#12242

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 01:23:11PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Debian's diversity statement commits us to be welcoming to all people
> regardless of who they *are*.
> 
> It does *not* commit us to welcome all people into our community regardless
> of the *idealogies they express*.
> 
> Nazis can fuck off.
> 
> I will reserve the right to tell nazis to fuck off, in private or in public
> according to what I deem most appropriate and effective, up until the point
> that the Debian Project kicks me out, or until it becomes clear to me that
> the Debian Project is no longer worth defending against nazis.

I wonder, though -- do we have a Nazi anywhere in the project?  Could you
point to one?


Meow!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ According to recent spams, "all my email accounts are owned
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ by a hacker".  So what's the problem?
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12266

On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 21:38 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> 
> I wonder, though -- do we have a Nazi anywhere in the project?  Could you
> point to one?


Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
fetishes and whatever else. But I expect that people keep these things out of
Debian and especially the public discussion as far as possble. So long as
Debian is not getting involved, it absolutely does not matter to us what
people do outside of Debian. Let's focus on creating the best distribution
instead.

-- 
 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12267

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 01:28:45 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:

> On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 21:38 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > I wonder, though -- do we have a Nazi anywhere in the project?  Could you
> > point to one?
> Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
> Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
> fetishes and whatever else.

I agree to a certain degree; as far as we talk about opinions or
beliefs, but (leftist slogan:) "fascism is not an opinion, it's a
crime" or (more verbose): I don't want to be in the same community as
people who deny other people their basic human dignity or (more
direct) who don't consider others as humans and want to kill them or
see them dead. And that's what Nationalsozialismus and facism is
about. [0]

Cheers,
gregor


[0] It gets a bit more complicated when differentiating between
"classic" Nazis and neo-nazis and old Italian fascists and
neo-facists and national conservatives and the (old) "Nouvelle
Droite" and the "Neue Rechte" and the "Identitäre" and all kinds of
right-wing extremists and right-wing populist and "autoritärer
Nationalradikalismus" … But in the end it boils down to the
"Ideologie der Ungleicheit", i.e. the belief that some people are
more valuable than others.

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Donovan: The little tin soldier

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12268

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 03:06:14AM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 01:28:45 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 21:38 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > I wonder, though -- do we have a Nazi anywhere in the project?  Could you
> > > point to one?
> > Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
> > Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
> > fetishes and whatever else.
> 
> I agree to a certain degree; as far as we talk about opinions or
> beliefs, but (leftist slogan:) "fascism is not an opinion, it's a
> crime" or (more verbose): I don't want to be in the same community as
> people who deny other people their basic human dignity or (more
> direct) who don't consider others as humans and want to kill them or
> see them dead. And that's what Nationalsozialismus and facism is
> about. [0]
> 
> Cheers,
> gregor
> 
> 
> [0] It gets a bit more complicated when differentiating between
> "classic" Nazis and neo-nazis and old Italian fascists and
> neo-facists and national conservatives and the (old) "Nouvelle
> Droite" and the "Neue Rechte" and the "Identitäre" and all kinds of
> right-wing extremists and right-wing populist and "autoritärer
> Nationalradikalismus" … But in the end it boils down to the
> "Ideologie der Ungleicheit", i.e. the belief that some people are
> more valuable than others.


Debian is about common goals. Sometimes I think we already have them,
sometimes I think we have a long way to go. Both scenarios, travelling
and living at the destination, are better with a "we".  A good "we"
improves by mutual respect.


Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Silence is hard to parse

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12277

>>>>> "gregor" == gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> writes:


I wrote a long post talking about an approach for possibly balancing
these trade offs in Debian.
Just my ideas, but perhaps reasonably well thought out.

Then I realized that now is not the time to send that post.
If in a month or so when things are calmed down, someone is interested
in that post, ping me and I'll send it.
If no one is interested I never need to dig it up.

--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12279

On Sun, 2021-04-11 at 03:06 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> 
> I agree to a certain degree; as far as we talk about opinions or
> beliefs, but (leftist slogan:) "fascism is not an opinion, it's a
> crime" or (more verbose): I don't want to be in the same community as
> people who deny other people their basic human dignity or (more
> direct) who don't consider others as humans and want to kill them or
> see them dead. And that's what Nationalsozialismus and facism is
> about. [0]


Agree, but on the other hand - luckily - there is no thought police and you
don't know (and actually I don't want to know) whats going on in the brain of
some people. Debian is a large project that attracts people from all over the
world, so there will be always people with opinions and backgrounds that we
personally don't want to support. 

-- 
 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12284

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021/04/11 01:28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
> Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
> fetishes and whatever else. But I expect that people keep these things out of
> Debian and especially the public discussion as far as possble. So long as
> Debian is not getting involved, it absolutely does not matter to us what
> people do outside of Debian. Let's focus on creating the best distribution
> instead.

Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.

-Jonathan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12285

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le lundi 12 avril 2021 à 14:56:34+0200, Jonathan Carter a écrit :
> On 2021/04/11 01:28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
> > Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
> > fetishes and whatever else. But I expect that people keep these things out of
> > Debian and especially the public discussion as far as possble. So long as
> > Debian is not getting involved, it absolutely does not matter to us what
> > people do outside of Debian. Let's focus on creating the best distribution
> > instead.
> 
> Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
> those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
> no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.

+1

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12286

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:56:34PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>On 2021/04/11 01:28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> Although I really prefer not to have them in the project, its is not the
>> Debian project's task to rule about political believs, opinions, religions,
>> fetishes and whatever else. But I expect that people keep these things out of
>> Debian and especially the public discussion as far as possble. So long as
>> Debian is not getting involved, it absolutely does not matter to us what
>> people do outside of Debian. Let's focus on creating the best distribution
>> instead.
>
>Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
>those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
>no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.

Does that go for all extremist ideologies or just the one?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12287

On 2021/04/12 15:37, Michael Stone wrote:
>> Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
>> those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
>> no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.
> 
> Does that go for all extremist ideologies or just the one?

Probably all of them. I don't have anything specific in mind, but my
guess is that there would be some edge cases where we disagree on what
would constitute an extremist ideology, I've thought that we should
probably amend our CoC at some point to explain what kind of people are
/not/ welcome in Debian, but that's a matter for another GR :)

-Jonathan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12290

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 04:55:28PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>On 2021/04/12 15:37, Michael Stone wrote:
>>> Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
>>> those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
>>> no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.
>>
>> Does that go for all extremist ideologies or just the one?
>
>Probably all of them. I don't have anything specific in mind, but my
>guess is that there would be some edge cases where we disagree on what
>would constitute an extremist ideology, I've thought that we should
>probably amend our CoC at some point to explain what kind of people are
>/not/ welcome in Debian, but that's a matter for another GR :)

Marxists? Maoists? Stalinists? Anarchists? Zionists? Anti-zionists? 
Militant Quebec nationalists? Royalists? Imperialists? Indigenous 
resistance groups? Ecoterrorists? Anyone that someone calls a terrorist?
Speciesists? Anti-speciesists? Eugenicists? Any government that comes to 
power via a coup? Any government that maintains power while suppressing 
popular revolt? Anyone who participated in genocide? Anyone descended 
from someone who participated in a genocide? Anyone who denies a 
genocide? Anyone repeating a false genocide narrative? (By the way, you 
had better be very, very careful about creating the appearance that 
debian (via the DPL) is taking a position on some of those, because you 
could get debian banned in various places if you say the wrong thing.)

The idea that "nazis" or "fascists" represent the full spectrum of what 
can go wrong in human systems, or that understanding complex and 
emotional conflicts is as simple as "blame the nazis" is simply wrong. 
I'd go so far as to posit that the only common element in extremist 
ideologies is the certainty that their own beliefs and tactics are both 
superior to their opponents', and unimpeachable. I'd further posit that 
it's possible to have extremist positions on any side of any issue 
humans can argue about, and also that it's generally impossible to 
identify a specific point on a continuum of beliefs at which a position 
changes from "reasonable disagreement" to "extremism".

The idea that debian should or even could create a list of acceptable 
and unacceptable beliefs in all facets of any participant's life is 
preposterous. All we can reasonably do is require certain standards of 
behavior within forums we control or which are immediately adjacent. 

Even from people who have declared that their opponent is a "nazi".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12294

On 2021/04/12 18:41, Michael Stone wrote:
> Marxists? Maoists? Stalinists? Anarchists? Zionists? Anti-zionists?
> Militant Quebec nationalists? Royalists? Imperialists? Indigenous
> resistance groups? Ecoterrorists? Anyone that someone calls a terrorist?
> Speciesists? Anti-speciesists? Eugenicists? Any government that comes to
> power via a coup? Any government that maintains power while suppressing
> popular revolt? Anyone who participated in genocide? Anyone descended
> from someone who participated in a genocide? Anyone who denies a
> genocide? Anyone repeating a false genocide narrative? (By the way, you
> had better be very, very careful about creating the appearance that
> debian (via the DPL) is taking a position on some of those, because you
> could get debian banned in various places if you say the wrong thing.)

That's purely up to DAM, and while there aren't any extensive background
checks, I can tell you that they're pretty good at spotting some red
flags (that other DDs can also raise with DAM during someone's NM process).

> The idea that "nazis" or "fascists" represent the full spectrum of what
> can go wrong in human systems, or that understanding complex and
> emotional conflicts is as simple as "blame the nazis" is simply wrong.
> I'd go so far as to posit that the only common element in extremist
> ideologies is the certainty that their own beliefs and tactics are both
> superior to their opponents', and unimpeachable. I'd further posit that
> it's possible to have extremist positions on any side of any issue
> humans can argue about, and also that it's generally impossible to
> identify a specific point on a continuum of beliefs at which a position
> changes from "reasonable disagreement" to "extremism".

It was clearly just one example, one that admittedly gets overused
because it's easy and lazy. And sure, there are all kinds of extremists,
although there are especially those who are most problematic in society
and in our communities.

> The idea that debian should or even could create a list of acceptable
> and unacceptable beliefs in all facets of any participant's life is
> preposterous. All we can reasonably do is require certain standards of
> behavior within forums we control or which are immediately adjacent.

It's really not all that preposterous, I think (judging by the long list
you posted in the first paragraph) that you're jumping to the incorrect
conclusions on what I'd like to achieve with expanding our CoC.

> Even from people who have declared that their opponent is a "nazi".

I would consider calling another person a "nazi" to be CoC violation
even on it's first point. Calling someone a nazi because you don't agree
with someone is certainly very disrespectful and highly inappropriate.

-Jonathan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12288

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:56:34PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
> those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
> no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.

Would you care to put that to a vote?  I think you'll lose -- and if
you win, you'll fracture the Project.

I say it with all respect, Jonathan, as someone who admires you and
judges you to have been a tactful, prudent, competent, energetic,
effective Leader; but politicization of Debian has gone far enough.  We
are not going to bar persons who identify with fascist doctrine or any
other doctrine from the Project if I have anything to say about it.

Someone might reply by citing the Code of Conduct
and Diversity Statement, but such citations do not impress me.  The Code
and Statement were adopted to smooth the Project's work, not to menace
political undesirables, nor to empower the easily offended.  In my
strong opinion, Diversity includes everyone, even, especially fascists.
And do you know what?  The text of the Diversity Statement agrees with
me, unless one were determined to twist its adverb "constructively" to
authorize mischievous *deconstruction* of the Project along
ideological lines.

For all I know, a handful of Members might be determined to do just
that.  I hope not.  If so, though, then I'll warrant that the
deconstructors are in the minority, and a small minority at that.  Given
an up-or-down vote, they would lose.

Meanwhile, regarding the GR, I have no comment except that I have cast
my vote, same as everyone else.  However, your statement as quoted above
cannot be supported.

The time for the tail to wag the dog is over.  It's time to get back to
the open source.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12289

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:30:21PM +0000, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:56:34PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>
>Someone might reply by citing the Code of Conduct
>and Diversity Statement, but such citations do not impress me.  The Code
>and Statement were adopted to smooth the Project's work, not to menace
>political undesirables, nor to empower the easily offended.  In my
>strong opinion, Diversity includes everyone, even, especially fascists.
>And do you know what?  The text of the Diversity Statement agrees with
>me, unless one were determined to twist its adverb "constructively" to
>authorize mischievous *deconstruction* of the Project along
>ideological lines.

Umm. Our diversity statement and CoC define agreed expectations of
behaviour and communication within the project; people espousing
fascist ideologies are surely not going to fit those standards. Do you
somehow think they're compatible?

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head but it's not me 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12291

On 2021-04-12 Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:30:21PM +0000, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
[...] 
>> Someone might reply by citing the Code of Conduct
>> and Diversity Statement, but such citations do not impress me.  The Code
>> and Statement were adopted to smooth the Project's work, not to menace
>> political undesirables, nor to empower the easily offended.  In my
>> strong opinion, Diversity includes everyone, even, especially fascists.
[...]
> Umm. Our diversity statement and CoC define agreed expectations of
> behaviour and communication within the project; people espousing
> fascist ideologies are surely not going to fit those standards. Do you
> somehow think they're compatible?

Thaddeus responded to
| if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
| those views off of the project channels,

so your question seems to be beside the point since the explicite
premise was that the hypothetic project member did not act fascist
within the project.

cu Andreas
-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12292

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>>>>> "Steve" == Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> writes:

    Steve> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:30:21PM +0000, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
    Steve> Umm. Our diversity statement and CoC define agreed
    Steve> expectations of behaviour and communication within the
    Steve> project; people espousing fascist ideologies are surely not
    Steve> going to fit those standards. Do you somehow think they're
    Steve> compatible?

In general, no, probably not.
But compared to judging which ideologies are automatic bans and which we
 will tolerate, focusing on whether someone can work
 consistently with the CoC and the diversity statement seems easier to
 evaluate and to defend.
I don't want to see us developing and debating (even within delegated
teams) a set of organizations we'll have no part of.
I'd rather see us focusing on whether members of our community follow
standards such as the CoC, diversity statement etc.
Some members of our community have claimed that others were Nazis or
fascist in ways that were not obvious to me.

I wrote the following remarks earlier today and decided not to send them
because I was hoping this discussion would die down.  It hasn't, so
here's my attempt to balance focusing on creating a welcoming community
while respecting political freedom of our members.
I understand I'm disagreeing with somemembers of the project.
I find that what Jonathan said today is too far for me.
But I find that the practical difference between what Jonathan advocates
and what I'd be comfortable with is small to non-existent.
I'm sharing this in the hopes that others can find middle grounds in
what I say.

First, to define extreme views.
I'd like to focus on views that deny the dignity of some, or that treat
some people as lesser than others.

My personal desire for the project would be to approach extreme views
that  are incompatible with treating everyone with dignity and humanity
as follows:

1) As Russ said, and I agree, we should not police thoughts.  What stays
inside your own head is none of our business.

2) If your statements (even outside of Debian) commit you to a path that
denies dignity, it's entirely reasonable for us to talk to you about
whether you'll be able to act in accordance with the CoC and diversity
statement.
Please convince us that you will be able to treat everyone in Debian
with dignity consistent with how we view dignity; convince us that your
actions in Debian will create a welcoming community and treat all our
members with respect.
If you can answer that question,  then we should hold you to that
answer.  If your answer is good, I don't think statements outside of
Debian should get in the way of your participation beyond raising the
discussion of how you will meet our community standards within Debian.
I do think if you affiliate yourself with an extreme ideology in your
statements outside Debian, it's reasonable for us to be highly skeptical
and to ask you to show us how it's going to work.

I understand some people in the project disagree with me and would like
to kick people out for their statements outside of Debian.
That's just further than I can go right now.


3) going around within Debian saying you are a political extremest
following a party that does not treat everyone with dignity is likely to
be incompatible with the CoC in and of itself.
It might depend on the context, but most contexts I can see would
reasonably make the classes of people your extreme ideology considers
lesser feel unwelcome.

4) Actions, especially actions within Debian that are inconsistent with
treating everyone with dignity need to be taken seriously.  If you have claimed
affiliation with a group that advocates such actions, I think it makes
it even more serious.


I think the practical effect of the above is that if you're acting as a
fascist , you won't be welcome here.
I'd prefer to make that determination based on actions rather than
affiliations.



--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12301

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I broadly agree with your framing of this, Sam, with one particular point of
disagreement.

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 01:17:30PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 2) If your statements (even outside of Debian) commit you to a path that
> denies dignity, it's entirely reasonable for us to talk to you about
> whether you'll be able to act in accordance with the CoC and diversity
> statement.
> Please convince us that you will be able to treat everyone in Debian
> with dignity consistent with how we view dignity; convince us that your
> actions in Debian will create a welcoming community and treat all our
> members with respect.
> If you can answer that question,  then we should hold you to that
> answer.  If your answer is good, I don't think statements outside of
> Debian should get in the way of your participation beyond raising the
> discussion of how you will meet our community standards within Debian.
> I do think if you affiliate yourself with an extreme ideology in your
> statements outside Debian, it's reasonable for us to be highly skeptical
> and to ask you to show us how it's going to work.

> I understand some people in the project disagree with me and would like
> to kick people out for their statements outside of Debian.
> That's just further than I can go right now.

If one has made statements outside of Debian demonstrating that they hold to
an ideology that denies the dignity of other members of the project, unless
those statements have been *recanted*, the existence of those statements has
a chilling effect on working with others within the project *per se*.  It is
not enough to ask that someone *pretend* to respect other members of the
project while working within the project, if their outside behavior shows
that they don't actually respect those other members of the project.

If a member of the Debian Project were known to have sexually assaulted
someone, this would be a concern for Debian being a safe environment.  It
wouldn't matter that the assault happened outside the context of Debian
work, or that this individual had no opportunity to assault people inside of
Debian.

The same applies to other, "lesser" behaviors that invalidate the innate
dignity of other members of the project.  A committment to keep one's mouth
shut in a Debian context doesn't remove awareness of the broader context.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12304

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Quoting Steve Langasek (2021-04-13 22:17:16)
> I broadly agree with your framing of this, Sam, with one particular point of
> disagreement.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 01:17:30PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > 2) If your statements (even outside of Debian) commit you to a path that
> > denies dignity, it's entirely reasonable for us to talk to you about
> > whether you'll be able to act in accordance with the CoC and diversity
> > statement.
> > Please convince us that you will be able to treat everyone in Debian
> > with dignity consistent with how we view dignity; convince us that your
> > actions in Debian will create a welcoming community and treat all our
> > members with respect.
> > If you can answer that question,  then we should hold you to that
> > answer.  If your answer is good, I don't think statements outside of
> > Debian should get in the way of your participation beyond raising the
> > discussion of how you will meet our community standards within Debian.
> > I do think if you affiliate yourself with an extreme ideology in your
> > statements outside Debian, it's reasonable for us to be highly skeptical
> > and to ask you to show us how it's going to work.
> 
> > I understand some people in the project disagree with me and would like
> > to kick people out for their statements outside of Debian.
> > That's just further than I can go right now.
> 
> If one has made statements outside of Debian demonstrating that they hold to
> an ideology that denies the dignity of other members of the project, unless
> those statements have been *recanted*, the existence of those statements has
> a chilling effect on working with others within the project *per se*.  It is
> not enough to ask that someone *pretend* to respect other members of the
> project while working within the project, if their outside behavior shows
> that they don't actually respect those other members of the project.
> 
> If a member of the Debian Project were known to have sexually 
> assaulted someone, this would be a concern for Debian being a safe 
> environment.  It wouldn't matter that the assault happened outside the 
> context of Debian work, or that this individual had no opportunity to 
> assault people inside of Debian.
> 
> The same applies to other, "lesser" behaviors that invalidate the 
> innate dignity of other members of the project.  A committment to keep 
> one's mouth shut in a Debian context doesn't remove awareness of the 
> broader context.

I understand how the above can make sense for a community.  It is 
however not how our current Code of Conduct is constructed, and 
consequently not a description of how *our* community works but only 
personal oppinion of yours.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12308

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>>>>> "Steve" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

Steve, I'm writing to confirm understanding of our disagreement and to
acknowledge the point you made and explain why it is not persuasive to
me.  I'm not trying to convince you to change your mind, simply letting
you know I've considered what you have to say, and making sure
everything is out on the table as we work toward consensus.

    Steve> If one has made statements outside of Debian demonstrating
    Steve> that they hold to an ideology that denies the dignity of
    Steve> other members of the project, unless those statements have
    Steve> been *recanted*, the existence of those statements has a
    Steve> chilling effect on working with others within the project
    Steve> *per se*.  It is not enough to ask that someone *pretend* to
    Steve> respect other members of the project while working within the
    Steve> project, if their outside behavior shows that they don't
    Steve> actually respect those other members of the project.

Steve, as I expected, this is our disagreement.

I hear the issue you are talking about, and  broadly agree that would
generally be the case.

However, excluding someone because of the ideas they have supported is a
really huge step, and I think that there is a slippery slope involved.

In practice I expect that my preferred outcome would produce the same
results as yours.
Because in practice, I expect when we asked someone about the extreme
ideas they supported outside of Debian, we would generally find they
didn't have a good answer for how they would meet our standards within
Debian.

It only matters if someone comes up with the good enough answer that
we'd consider them.  To me, taking the step you propose of actually
excluding someone because of ideologies they support is a big step.  I'd
rather not do that if lesser steps like excluding someone because they
cannot explain how they would work constructively in uor community work.

I guess If someone had an answer to that question, I'd rather listen to
that answer and make up my mind (or have whoever is delegated at the
time do so).
I cannot see such an answer now, but again and again I find that my
imagination is insufficient to reality.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12293

On 2021/04/12 17:30, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:56:34PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>> Not true, if someone identifies with fascist doctrine, even if they keep
>> those views off of the project channels, then they are not welcome here,
>> no matter where they engaged in those kind of activities.
> 
> Would you care to put that to a vote?  I think you'll lose -- and if
> you win, you'll fracture the Project.

Whether I'd like to put that to a vote? Good question! I'll have to come
back to you on that. At the very least, I hope that we get to the point
where we can have better information gathering and decision making
within the project, and that if we do need to make a formal,
project-wide poll, that we have something better than a GR as our only
blunt instrument for that.

> I say it with all respect, Jonathan, as someone who admires you and
> judges you to have been a tactful, prudent, competent, energetic,
> effective Leader; but politicization of Debian has gone far enough.  We
> are not going to bar persons who identify with fascist doctrine or any
> other doctrine from the Project if I have anything to say about it.

*blush* uhm, that's a lot of nice words from someone I haven't even met
yet, so thanks for cushioning the blow.

I'm pretty sure that you're familiar with the paradox of tolerance, so
I'm not going to bore or patronize you by explaining it, but at some
point we have to draw a line at what kind of people we allow inside our
community. Thankfully, to the best of my knowledge, we have no neo-nazis
or similar extremists within our community. I'd like to keep it that
way. Sometimes people with opposing views are valuable, but other times
they are just destructive. Bigots in all shapes and form will ultimately
only hurt the project if we allow them in. And ultimately, I guide my
decisions on what's best for the project, not by the feelings of those
who don't care about the feelings of others.

> Someone might reply by citing the Code of Conduct
> and Diversity Statement, but such citations do not impress me.  The Code
> and Statement were adopted to smooth the Project's work, not to menace
> political undesirables, nor to empower the easily offended.  In my
> strong opinion, Diversity includes everyone, even, especially fascists.
> And do you know what?  The text of the Diversity Statement agrees with
> me, unless one were determined to twist its adverb "constructively" to
> authorize mischievous *deconstruction* of the Project along
> ideological lines.

It's true that the CoC does indeed state that everyone is welcome,
without mentioning exceptions, but the only kind of people I would
exclude are the people who by their very beliefs and way of living,
already violate the CoC. I don't think that's very controversial,

> For all I know, a handful of Members might be determined to do just
> that.  I hope not.  If so, though, then I'll warrant that the
> deconstructors are in the minority, and a small minority at that.  Given
> an up-or-down vote, they would lose.

Those of us who are working to fix the problems in our community are
doing so because we want to grow our community, not because we want to
deconstruct anything. We're tired of seeing people leave because of
mysogyny or similar offenses, we want to build Debian into something
much bigger and be inclusive of all walks of like while doing so.

> Meanwhile, regarding the GR, I have no comment except that I have cast
> my vote, same as everyone else.  However, your statement as quoted above
> cannot be supported.

Well, I suppose we fundamentally disagree then. Thanks for voting, though.

> The time for the tail to wag the dog is over.  It's time to get back to
> the open source.

Despite the turmoil in the organisation we so deeply care about (and we
do care about the FSF), Debian has been making good strides. There's the
FTP team that did stellar work ahead of freeze which helped smooth out
our initial freeze stages. I've made some gentle pushes in a few areas
and our community has responded so well that it even seems likely that
we may have the release for bullseye by the end of May[1], which is
quite good if you consider that buster was released in July with similar
freeze dates preseeding that. There's been great work all around the
project over the last here. The mentors site has had a big overhaul,
fixing many of its issues and modernising the stack, that site is
crucial for helping new contributors with getting their packages in to
Debian. Debian Trends have been updated, the Debian Screenshots site has
a completely revamped look and feel, our front page on our website has
had a re-design (with further changes planned to make it look really
snazzy), we gained preseed.debian.net, a new service to list all preseed
options, we've done experiments to re-build the archive with clang,
worked on machine learning policy, deprecated debhelper 5+6, we've even
gotten computers to handle more of our packaging work with the help of
the Debian Janitor, we now have archive rebuilds as a service, an
architecture crossgrader packaged within the Debian archive, we host a
fresh new debuginfod service (possibly the largest one that exists, we
gained Fabre - a very user-friendly web front end to the BTS. We worked
on our relationships with external entities, strenghening our
relationship with companies like Lenovo, Hetzner, OVH, rsync.net and
more (details to follow in our usual channels, but I love that more and
more organisations actively want to work with us), we hosted our first
ever online minidebconf, which taught us a lot in the build-up to DC20,
our first ever completely online DebConf that went really well and was
followed by more great online events that followed it. Our NM process
continued to become even easier, resulting in 26 new DDs and a nice big
swell of 46 new DMs, of which hopefully a good amount will become DDs in
the future.

The list above is non-exhaustive it's really just what I could come up
with while writing this mail, we've had a year with lots of progress in
important areas, and I'm confident this year will end up even better.

And sure, there are some regressions, some packages that I would've
really liked to have seen make it into testing before the hard freeze,
but my point is that we've really been /open-sourcing/ *hard*. There are
many of us working nearly every single day (I've had 6 days over the
last year that I didn't work on Debian) who work hard to make Debian
better. People who only participate on mailing lists have a very
different view of Debian than those who spend more time providing
improvements to the project and our releases. I think a comment like
you've made above says more about you than it does about the project,
and I suggest that you consider following your own advice.

-Jonathan

[1]
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/665ff395-7957-c210-d050-2faee9ca74d0@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web