SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Michael Larabel over at Phoronix brings us news of a stealth Social Justice coup over at FreeDesktop.org:
X.Org, GStreamer, Wayland, LibreOffice, Mesa, VA-API, Harfbuzz, and SPICE are among the many projects hosted by FreeDesktop.org that now appear to be on a contributor covenant / code of conduct.
The Contributor Covenant for those unfamiliar with it is trying to promote a code of conduct for open-source projects that is trying to promote diversity and equality of contributors to libre software projects. From the covenant's website, "Part of this problem [of "free, libre, and open source projects suffer from a startling lack of diversity, with dramatically low representation by women, people of color, and other marginalized populations"] lies with the very structure of some projects: the use of insensitive language, thoughtless use of pronouns, assumptions of gender, and even sexualized or culturally insensitive names."
The covenant states in part that those contributing should use welcoming and inclusive language, be respectful to others, showing empathy towards others, avoid insulting comments, and avoid inappropriate conduct. For the most part, it's basically common sense.
Now it seems this Contributor Covenant is being forced onto all FreeDesktop.org-hosted projects.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @12:24PM (9 children)
If they actually gave a single shit about equality, their 'code of conduct' would use a policy where contributors were FORBIDDEN from revealing their gender or race over official channels. That way, all contributors would actually be equal and judged primarily on the quality of their code and technical arguments.
But they didn't, and because of that, we see what this is actually about - seizing power, controlling people, virtue signalling, censorship, and revenge. Or rather, turning the core of the project from producing code towards these things. That said, some of these projects seem to have had this rot in them before, but this is a lot more public and explicit about enshrining it.
(Score: 1) by AssCork on Monday April 10 2017, @02:10PM (2 children)
They don't even want the power, most often they just want attention.
"LOOK! We made them do something different!"
Then they move on.
Someone needs to start a Fight Club for SJWs "The first rule about equality is that you don't talk about equality"
Just popped-out of a tight spot. Came out mostly clean, too.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by jmorris on Monday April 10 2017, @04:55PM (1 child)
Then they move on.
Citation needed. Law #2 says "SJWs Always Double Down."
They never move on until the organization is destroyed, the demands increase. Once they have purged anyone who might possibly object they move on to consuming all of the resources of the original organization as they shift the focus of it to Social Justice. The CoC is only the opening gambit. Next the convention budget gets redirected from a booth and paying a couple of starving devels to attend to sponsoring a Women in Tech track. A bunch of fully trained Diversity Coordinators come onboard at $150K per diverse head. The mentoring programs kick off. And so on. Google can supply the hundreds of examples for you if you dig a bit. Intel has enough revenue to sustain a lot of these ticks on its back and still push the tech front forward, Freedesktop.org and GNOME not so much.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:01PM
That is a most awesome metaphor.
good list of typical abominations too
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @03:35PM
Who sponsors FreeDesktop.org? or influences it? I suspect George Soros and his hired guns is around..
(Score: 4, Insightful) by eravnrekaree on Monday April 10 2017, @03:39PM (2 children)
This whole idea that there is this disdain for women in programmer communities is a myth. It is true that there are a lot of men in programming, but the SJWs thn assume it must be because women are excluded. There is really no such exclusion. the idea that programmers dont like a code contribution because it comes from a woman or lower value it is just insane, its insane craziness. Many SJWs believe that they are being systematically oppressed and anything and everything is oppression, its hypersensitivity. So they see things that are not there. The demographics of participation in programming, Its is due to the fact fewer women have chosen to be involved software development. If more women want to become interested, this is great. Programming should be meritocracy, gender has nothing to do with it.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by melikamp on Monday April 10 2017, @04:08PM (1 child)
What is SJW? People who are vocal about social justice issues? Funny how you can see into the minds of people, and then generalize despite the fact that some notions of social justice (for example, islamic or christian social justice) are inherently biased against women. You are just bullshitting, aren't you? Using SJW as a vague pejorative and making shit up?
No, it's just stats [arstechnica.com], mon, and if this one study is flawed, I am sure you can find others by googling.
This is in light of women being (apparently) on average better at coding, and
which the study explained by noting that
So the gender bias manifesting as higher-rate code rejection is not an "insane craziness", it's supported by stats. Obviously there are ways to overcome it, and it looks like females have found those ways, but pretending the bias does not exist in the face of facts is what I would call craziness.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @07:28PM
This is in light of women being (apparently) on average better at coding, and
[citation needed]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by https on Monday April 10 2017, @03:45PM
Your virtue signalling is transparent.
Offended and laughing about it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @10:27PM
If they actually gave a single shit about equality, their 'code of conduct' would use a policy where contributors were FORBIDDEN from revealing their gender or race over official channels. That way, all contributors would actually be equal and judged primarily on the quality of their code and technical arguments.
WTF?
Instead of establishing an expectation of equal treatment regardless of who you are, people must hide who they are so that the idiots who can't control themselves won't be triggered into misbehaving.
That's like saying if women don't want to be raped, they need to cover their bodies so men won't be incited to rape them.
Screw that shit. If you can't treat people decently, you are the one who needs to hide your identity.