Re: removing toxic emailers

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 9:08 PM Frosku <frosku@frosku.com> wrote:
>
> On the other hand, I also think that a project which goes too far in
> policing speech, especially speech unrelated to the project, will drive away
> talented people who are more than willing to comply with the project's norms
> within the project's spaces. Trying to enforce the 'California cultural
> standard' on not only someone's interactions with the project but their
> entire life (which may be lived in a very different cultural setting) seems
> very invasive and culturally exclusionary.

I do live in California, but I don't know what the "California
cultural standard" is.  It's a big place, and it's full of people who
behave in all kinds of different ways.  Harvey Weinstein and
brogrammer culture are California cultures.  You presumably have
something in mind, but I'm not sure it's a real thing.


> I'd be interested to know where you draw the line as to what behavior is
> related to the project, or if you don't draw a line, why volunteers in China,
> Russia, Poland etc should be expected to accept an entire political doctrine
> over their life to contribute to a compiler toolchain.

How did we get to accepting an entire political doctrine?

What I have in mind is treating people with respect.  For example, I'm
involved with the Go programming language.  The Go community has a
code of conduct: https://golang.org/conduct.  The key elements are:

- Be friendly and welcoming
- Be patient
  Remember that people have varying communication styles and that not
everyone is using their native language. (Meaning and tone can be lost
in translation.)
- Be thoughtful
  Productive communication requires effort. Think about how your words
will be interpreted.
  Remember that sometimes it is best to refrain entirely from commenting.
- Be respectful
  In particular, respect differences of opinion.
- Be charitable
  Interpret the arguments of others in good faith, do not seek to disagree.
  When we do disagree, try to understand why.

  Avoid destructive behavior:

  Derailing: stay on topic; if you want to talk about something else,
start a new conversation.
  Unconstructive criticism: don't merely decry the current state of
affairs; offer—or at least solicit—suggestions as to how things may be
improved.
  Snarking (pithy, unproductive, sniping comments)
  Discussing potentially offensive or sensitive issues; this all too
often leads to unnecessary conflict.
  Microaggressions: brief and commonplace verbal, behavioral and
environmental indignities that communicate hostile, derogatory or
negative slights and insults to a person or group.


That is what I would aim for.  And in general that is how the GCC
community behaves.  I don't know whether that is "California culture"
or not.


And I have to note that I have seen very few people here saying "RMS
must never participate in GCC in any way."  What I see most people
saying is "RMS should not be in a position of leading the GCC project
and telling people what to do."

Ian