llvm dev - May 2016 - Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct

On 5 May 2016 at 12:42, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
wrote:
> I'm against the ownership of firearms, and go at great lengths and
> poorly choosing words in a discussion, which some could consider rude,
> with person X about it. I know person X for decades and have earned
> the right to offend him/her personally as they know I don't mean it
> (could be a joke, and internal one even). This is a very strong
> cultural point in many countries, including Brazil. The stronger two
> people can offend each other and shrug, the stronger their bond is.
Just for the sake of completeness, there are four main cases:

1. I interact with X outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
part in this whatsoever.

2. I interact with Y outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
part in this whatsoever.

3. I interact with Y outside LLVM, *about* their ability to perform as
an LLVM developer, Y gets offended. The code *may* have something to
do about it, but as you say, the sanctions *have* to be *way* less
serious.

4. I interact with Y inside LLVM, Y gets offended. That's what the
code is all about.

Makes sense?

--renato

Is it so simple though?

For example - I generally find a minimal or moderate amount of
profanity be both acceptable and actually useful from time to time. On
a mailing list there's a ton of context and tone lost, but on a
youtube post or podcast you have a bit extra.. in person there's also
non-verbal communication.

If I flip off someone, which is typically considered some level of
moderately offensive, in the LLVM community - what then?

Is the list PG, PG-13, R or at what level do "we" adults all consider
"ok". Even on broadcast tv (in the US) you'll hear some profanity.
(context)
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts

Some people have pointed out that they don't like the R-rated style of
the LKML. Profanity and no holds barred just isn't for some people. I
can respect that, but personally I find it more funny and raw/honest.

What I'm trying to say - define offensive.. it will probably all come
down to a "reasonable person who is part of the community" - a noobie
could roll in and drop some 4 letter words and mean no harm.. that
could be on irc or the mailing list or... someone would probably let
him know what the community expects in that circumstance.. We don't
need to point him at some complicated *** wall of text describing blah
blah blah..

So using myself as an example - Above I censored myself, but any
reasonable person could probably figure out which word I meant...

Since David's my friend I'll pick on him for a minute - David C. I
think you're a F**** m*** f*****er - Should he be offended or do we
play a complicated game of guess what I meant.

Things not yet covered so far.... and this is super difficult to articulate...

On the list exists one person whom is an excellent engineer (not me),
but he sometimes comes across just on the left side of being a bully
(I hope not me). Never crossing the line - his attitude comes really
close, but probably never crosses the line of being pushy(guilty).
I've seen only a handful of people actually stand up against him,
because mostly his technical stuff is great and spot on. IMHO we just
all be a little bit tough and NO_ACTION_REQUIRED. With some written
policy in place - I could see this person then having to maybe hold
back his very valuable feedback, because sometimes you just have to
fight for it.. Pretty please don't restrict passionate people - when
you love something, you passionately need to defend it at times..
Sincere intentions, but strong words..
----------------
I've given examples of why a complicated and extensive approach may
fail. To try to turn this into something constructive. I really hope
for something super super simple.. (KISS)

In the world there exists arbitrators/moderators - Why not define a
couple of "adults" who have demonstrated a history of strong and
reasonable character. People who can defuse situations and basically
be the guy which "we" trust to make good decisions. Elect 3 -
something pops up... we go to them to make a decision or help fix
stuff. It's low volume so shouldn't be a burden.. they would likely
help out anyway..

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 5 May 2016 at 12:42, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
wrote:
>> I'm against the ownership of firearms, and go at great lengths and
>> poorly choosing words in a discussion, which some could consider rude,
>> with person X about it. I know person X for decades and have earned
>> the right to offend him/her personally as they know I don't mean it
>> (could be a joke, and internal one even). This is a very strong
>> cultural point in many countries, including Brazil. The stronger two
>> people can offend each other and shrug, the stronger their bond is.
>
> Just for the sake of completeness, there are four main cases:
>
> 1. I interact with X outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
> part in this whatsoever.
>
> 2. I interact with Y outside LLVM, Y gets offended. The code has no
> part in this whatsoever.
>
> 3. I interact with Y outside LLVM, *about* their ability to perform as
> an LLVM developer, Y gets offended. The code *may* have something to
> do about it, but as you say, the sanctions *have* to be *way* less
> serious.
>
> 4. I interact with Y inside LLVM, Y gets offended. That's what the
> code is all about.
>
> Makes sense?
>
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

On 5 May 2016 at 13:23, C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
wrote:
> Is the list PG, PG-13, R or at what level do "we" adults all
consider
> "ok". Even on broadcast tv (in the US) you'll hear some
profanity.
> (context)
>
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
Excellent context!

> Some people have pointed out that they don't like the R-rated style of
> the LKML. Profanity and no holds barred just isn't for some people. I
> can respect that, but personally I find it more funny and raw/honest.
I don't care much about the swearing like "s***, I broke the bots
again", but I understand not everyone is like that, so I avoid to the
best of my abilities.

I can easily cope with "this code is a piece of s***", because
sometimes it really is. Some people take it personal, though, so it's
best if we all always avoid that kind of talk.

But there's nothing dubious about: "you are a piece of s*** for
writing this code". That is totally unacceptable.

Now, encoding this in the CoC is the hard part...

> In the world there exists arbitrators/moderators - Why not define a
> couple of "adults" who have demonstrated a history of strong and
> reasonable character. People who can defuse situations and basically
> be the guy which "we" trust to make good decisions. Elect 3 -
> something pops up... we go to them to make a decision or help fix
> stuff. It's low volume so shouldn't be a burden.. they would likely
> help out anyway..
That's another point I had forgotten.

I don't think the people in this committee should be nominated, but
voted. This is more than just the LLVM Foundation doing stuff on the
side, this is out whole community, of which the foundation is only
part of.

I feel very strongly about that, even if I trust the people that get
nominated. Others might not, and that'd be against the very code we're
trying to uphold.

cheers,
--renato