Gleb Popov via llvm-dev
2018-May-07 08:40 UTC
[llvm-dev] Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> What unmitigated bullshit. Your attempt at logic is laughable. You hold up > threadbare stereotypes as the norm, when in reality they are little more > than characters straight out of Central Casting. The "genius hermit who > can't associate with people" is dumb and false. It's meant to excuse > behavior that is unacceptable, >Where did you get that? when in reality a person who cannot interact with people is emotionally> stunted and not deserving of accolades. > > Please peddle your bullshit elsewhere. > > -bw > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Unnamed Poster via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Non-meritocratic technology and academic projects will be damned. >> >> This is a general response to Renato's response to Rafael's post, and >> also to the media discussion sparked by this thread at >> http://www.businessinsider.com/programmers-debate-requirements-to-behave- >> respectfully-ccoc-2018-5 , continuation of this topic would need to be >> moved off-list: >> >> >> Any high complexity technology or academic project involvoing more people >> needs to follow a meritocratic model to survive and thrive. >> >> In other words, within the project, your worth amounts to your past >> contributions to the project and your present knowledge of all the >> project's material technological and academic aspects. >> >> Last years, a stress has been put on parts of the open source community >> to submit to an agenda that is not technologically or academically >> motivated, but instead is "socially" motivated. >> >> What I see is that normally this ""social"" agenda reduces to the >> cultural-marxist social control trick of coercing people to comply with >> "the values", where "the values" may appear well-intended and "just" >> through being codified in some written form, but in reality are arbitrary >> and actually function as a control tool for parties that are not really >> contributing to the project and who have no real preference for the >> project's advancement whatsoever, but instead only want to prey on its good >> name to boost their egoes. >> >> Attempts to formalize a social code for participating in an open source >> project, where factors that are not related to project merit are included >> such as sexuality, ideology and ethnicity, will by its nature cause a >> competence exodus, and left will be the legacy of what the previous >> productive participants did before they were scared away by the "social >> conformists" who now dominate. >> >> Based on my own experience with many highest-competence software experts >> in programming, software architecture and so on, I suggest that highly >> qualified software people tend to have slightly unpolished personalities. >> This may be primarily because these people's primary passion is to give all >> their energy to bring progress to the technology and academic work, which >> is an all-consuming task and leaves no energy-space left in a person to >> develop traits such as being a drama queen, attention-seeking victim type, >> or other type that would distract the project. >> >> This social dynamic is deep, where highly qualified people tend to be >> less good at managing social circumstances and therefore prefer to leave, >> while the less qualified people envy the performance of the more qualified, >> and so the less qualified try to prey on the more qualified up to the point >> that the project is socially bankrupt. >> >> The highly qualified people are in nature meritocrats because the tech >> and academic details of the project is frequently the only thing they are >> really fluent in, and any risk of being judged by any other standard than >> material project merit would be felt as immensely offputting to them, and >> so hence the competence exodus. >> >> For this reason I suggest that if you think you need a social code, it >> reflects that you have less-competent people on board and likely in charge >> already, and the project's best interest would be to not encourage their >> participation and instead encourage the participation of those who provenly >> do contribute. >> >> If you fail, and Rafael's leaving is a strong indicator that you are >> quite far down that slope already, then I hope some group that is smarter >> and better than you will fork your project and bring the world the >> potentials lying in LLVM/Clang that your particular social circle failed at >> providing. >> >> You will never be able to stick a social policy to a project where >> technology and academic progress matters. >> >> If what you do would be contagious, you're also contributing to killing >> any meaningful open forum ambitions in the open source community altogether. >> >> >> >> Extended version: >> >> If an open source project and the people who like to congregate on >> conferences, are not attending based on merits quantified in code and >> academic contributions, then the project is technically history and dead >> and there is nothing of substance to confer about. >> >> >> Rafael writes: >> > Unfortunately the last few years haven't been the same. On the >> > technical side llvm now feels far bigger and slower to change. There >> > are many incomplete transitions. That, by itself, would not be >> > sufficient reason to leave. >> >> This seems to be a case in point - LLVM used to be a focus of code and >> academic process as in an interesting forum for technological and academic >> work. >> >> Now that time has passed and what's left is "hot air", and people without >> coding or academic edge can prey on LLVM's good name that was built up in >> the past. >> >> It's not uncommon for merit-lacking participants to coerce the whole >> extended group into compliance with their control, which enforces the >> dead-shell model of the project as noone with tech or academic aspirations >> possibly could find inspiration or space for real work in such an >> environment. >> >> What would you better give your energy to, stay home/at the office in >> peace to work on making the project better, or attend a conference where >> some unkown lunatic could attack you for transgressing an irrelevant policy? >> >> >> Rafael writes: >> > The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice >> > movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared >> > about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just >> > writing a good compiler framework. >> >> Renato writes: >> > You'll see that this is not an LLVM trend, but a world wide trend and >> > that's not a bad thing. >> >> Renato, you are not correct. By justifying this gunk you're drawing on >> yourself big problems for you and others. >> >> >> Rafael: >> > It is, and I wholeheartedly agree, an exaggerated and poisonous trend, >> > but it's a response to an even more poisonous history and one that >> > needed a change. >> >> The poisonous history of working hard, with zero financial incentive or >> gain, for the general public's benefit and for academic advancement, with >> no guarantee whatsoever for success, and the freedom to discuss that >> process with others who do the same? >> >> If this is your risk model then I suggest you exit open source, there are >> plenty positions in politics for you. >> >> >> Renato: >> > History is not stable, nor it's a steady progression. History happens >> > in hiccups, step-function-like sudden increases in pressure, which are >> > then followed by attenuated periodic function. This is one of them. >> >> This is hot air. >> >> >> Rafael: >> > Somewhat recently a code of conduct was adopted. It says that the >> > community tries to welcome people of all "political belief". Except >> > those whose political belief mean that they don't agree with the code >> > of conduct. Since agreement is required to take part in the >> > conferences, I am no longer able to attend. >> >> This is the control model of marxism and cultural marxism especially: You >> end up with a doctrine saying that participants are required to comply with >> "the values", to not be eliminated from participation. >> >> Normally noone has a copy of "the values", or at least it's clear in >> practice that "the values" are effectively unwritten, and this creates the >> perfect breeding ground for the community to be taken over and run by total >> creeps. >> >> The de-facto discontinuance of any real progress or results will be of no >> bother to them. >> >> >> Renato: >> > I defended your point of view in the code of conduct, but I have come >> > to accept what it is, not what it says. The code is just a statement >> > and have not changed how we behave (I don't think you would ever be >> > kicked out of a conference). >> >> The meritocratic creed is that any good useful code commit or paper that >> is submitted should be reviewed and if found to advance the material >> qualities of the project, be included. >> >> The function of a social environment is primarily to facilitate the >> interaction between the people who are the most devoted to that >> technological and academic work when and as they are doing exactly that. >> >> A possible second function of a social environment would be to provide >> the time and space for meeting between those who know more or are more up >> to date about the tech and academic progress and who want to give time to >> sharing their insights, to those for who in earnest want to learn more >> about it. >> >> >> Renato: >> > What I could not change and still fear is the report policy, which >> > leaves no room for the accused to defend itself, or even know it's >> > been accused. But that's not a discussion for this thread. >> >> A report policy would reflect that your project has already failed, that >> for some reason you are pulling drama queens and social profiteers already. >> Such people have normally not done any good code or academic work in the >> first place, as real work for creating progress and social drama are very >> different forms of activity and normally a person who does one of those >> will not be very good at the other. >> >> I have a hard time seeing someone who is proven world-leading in a >> particular technology or academic discipline, at the same time give energy >> to distract a community. >> >> In other words, intentionally or unintentionally you have recruited >> suckers. >> >> >> Renato: >> > However, the main point here is why we have it and who is doing it. I >> > know Chandler and Tanya for a while and, while I do not speak for >> > them, I trust them to *want* to do the right thing (tm). >> >> If they need political or sexual codes for their "LLVM" conference, wish >> them good luck with their social charity and have fun with their social >> distractions. >> >> At some point, some group of people who actually want a better compiler >> and who want to work for it, will either fork LLVM to LLVN / LLVM2, or >> start from scratch. >> >> >> Renato: >> > If they miss the mark, or make mistakes, I'd first point out to them, >> > not assume ill intent. This has been my personal experience and I have >> > no reason to change behaviour. >> >> Again, if you lost grips of meritocracy so much in your tech-academic >> project that you need ideological and sexual management, you are done and >> over with already. >> >> >> Renato: >> > However, the main point here is why we have it and who is doing it. I >> > know Chandler and Tanya for a while and, while I do not speak for >> > them, I trust them to *want* to do the right thing (tm). >> >> Social policies can be justified by beautifully-sounding, good intentions. >> >> Why don't we criminialize thought crimes, the world would be a better >> place without unnice thoughts, wouldn't it. >> >> That particular persons have fallen prey for the temptation of censoring >> a community according to principles that are irrelevant for the project, >> does not mean they are faring with bad intentions. >> >> You seem to already have lost yourself in trying to define a >> technology-academic project in social terms and hence gotten distracted >> from focus on progress. >> >> Meanwhile, competent people intuitively feel really bad that their work >> is preyed on as food for others' ego dramas that have been totally out of >> the scope and intention of their work, and so you get competence exodus. >> >> >> Renato: >> > For what it's worth, so far, I have found the LLVM community fair and >> > just on how it treats its citizens, as I have myself fell foul from >> > ill behaviour of other members and that has been solved decently and >> > properly. >> >> A competent unnice person may be so as a way to emphasise to you that he >> is doing you a free of charge favor by talking to you at all, and that it's >> on your table to do homework. >> >> I suggest that a common quality among people who have real expertise, >> have slightly edgy characters, as their energy has gone into the passion of >> their interest rather than to polishing their social interaction skills. >> >> Noone is forcing you to spend time with them. You can run your own >> Victims Anonymous or any other project you like, without them. >> >> >> Reading, studying and testing sourcecode yourself at home may be for you. >> >> Meeting people who have accomplished stuff, is a privilege and not a >> right. >> >> >> Real transgression such as physical violence or physical harassment have >> already been codified by applicable law and would be dealt with by the >> police and courts, and do not need your extensions. >> >> >> Renato: >> > It's really hard to find places that will fund developers, especially >> > young ones and the ones that have no other opportunity. But we have to >> > be careful with whom sponsors our devs and why. >> >> Who said anyone would fund you? You are your own. >> >> LLVM is a highly complex software project. If apart from paying the >> smartest, best and most knowledgeable people you can find to bring LLVM >> development work the highest practical value possible, you also want to >> appoint some junior trainee in the hope that he'd learn quickly, then I >> hope that you would not use that effort as a vehicle for a political e.g. >> marxist agenda, you can obviously use it to rant unendingly about how good >> you are, but it will not help the project or bring anything than unease to >> those who are really devoted to its technological and academic advancement. >> >> >> Renato: >> > I truly believe the "fix" for this problem is: let's talk. Not here, >> > this is the dev list, but let's create a place where we can discuss >> > these things. >> >> If anyone who really would like to contribute code or academically to >> LLVM has emotions that distract them from doing so, then sure as a separate >> act of charity maybe someone can give some time to discuss and to bring >> comfort to that person. >> >> >> Participating in LLVM or any other interaction with others, is a >> privilege and not a right. >> >> The act of committing world-class technology expertise into a project, >> does not come with strings attached, such as an obligation to interact with >> anyone for any reason. >> >> If you want to learn something and others don't want to share their >> knowledge, then offer them something, for instance payment. If they don't >> accept your price offer, then offer them a higher pay. >> >> >> You will never be able to stick a social policy to a project where >> technology and academic progress matters. >> >> I hope you are seeing the writing on the wall of this symbolic >> death-throe for your project as one of your most accomplished developers >> now has thrown in the towel. >> >> Based on what you write, your project is over. >> >> >> If what you do would be contagious, you're also contributing to killing >> any meaningful open forum ambitions in the open source community altogether. >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180507/ce870f75/attachment.html>
Apparently Analagous Threads
- Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm
- Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm
- Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm
- Non-meritocratic t.&a. projects will be damned. Re: I am leaving llvm
- I am leaving llvm