The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20230428124013/https://lwn.net/Articles/746013/
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 10:11 UTC (Thu) by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
In reply to: Too many lords, not enough stewards by msnitzer
Parent article: Too many lords, not enough stewards

> The first person to win the race to assert that they have a right to escalate to the Linux Foundation's TAB is usually the snowflake who just isn't able to convey their technical views in a convincing way.

As you say, sweeping generalisations aren't helpful. But even the code of conflict refers to people being 'abused' or 'threatened'. I have a hard time seeing how personal abuse and threats are part of 'keeping it all about the code', and everything being purely technical.


(Log in to post comments)

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 13:32 UTC (Thu) by msnitzer (guest, #57232) [Link]

The race I referred is more about creating a false narrative just to "win" something. And that something is trying to paint the person they are in conflict with as "wrong" when all else fails. We all lose if/when such tactics are deployed. Crying "fire!" when there isn't, etc.

Abuse and threats are _not_ OK. But a person who isn't getting their way that falsely resorts to such accusations is the definition of dysfunction and even cancer. It is like a woman evoking "I feel threatened" when she has absolutely no reason to be. She knows it'll get people to back off even when she is what is wrong. Those instances must be called out and rejected. But they aren't, because the person went nuclear and nobody wants to touch it. And because that person already established themselves as erratic and misguided and largely beyond consoling or help.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 15:28 UTC (Thu) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]

> But a person who isn't getting their way that falsely resorts to such accusations is the definition of dysfunction and even cancer.

Of course. I don't know anyone who's argued for strong codes of conduct and enforcement, who thinks false claims are a good thing which should be encouraged. Any system which isn't prepared to handle false claims is counterproductive and broken.

Despite the hysteria though, there doesn't actually seem to be documented cases of abuses of reasonable strong systems. On the other hand, there are a huge number of cases where the lack of such a system has been exploited to abuse people.

But you can run DM how you like, and make sure all the snowflakes are run out.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 16:36 UTC (Thu) by msnitzer (guest, #57232) [Link]

> But you can run DM how you like, and make sure all the snowflakes are run out.

Using "snowflake" obviously triggers people. I could've used a different word. But snowflake really does serve a purpose. It is describing the people who generally do have problems. I'm in favor of enabling people to realize their goals and help as I can. To that end I'm forced to deal with conflicting opinions, requirements, and other more unsavory ratholes that come with that. It is the sad reality of being a maintainer. And it certainly does make the role feel like "work". If people could let the past be the past we'd be better off. Easier said than done. Most maintainers really are good and helpful. For those that aren't, we're forced to "suck it up" and "roll with the punches". Same goes for problematic developers that foster dysfunctional exchanges more than ideal.

Really not trying to be controversial. But flippant responses like "But you can run DM how you like, and make sure all the snowflakes are run out." are received loud and clear. I can be better. And so can you.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 18:24 UTC (Thu) by excors (subscriber, #95769) [Link]

I think the problem is that there generally appears to be a significant overlap between people who use the terms "snowflake" and "trigger" derisively, and people who behave toxically themselves. Perfectly reasonable people might have legitimate concerns about a code of conduct sometimes being used as a weapon rather than as a shield, but use of those terms gives the impression of not being one of those people.

Maybe that's not what you intended at all, but I don't think I'm alone in perceiving that subtext. If you want to avoid misinterpretation, don't use words that have strong unwanted connotations in the communities you interact with.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 1, 2018 18:59 UTC (Thu) by msnitzer (guest, #57232) [Link]

Yeap, and like others your pattern matching is a bit too automatic. That's fine. I don't fault you for assuming the worst simply because I used the term "snowflake". I just think its use is sometimes apropos. This topic being one of those instances. Because there are assholes, snowflakes, egomaniacal people. And they can be called what they are. There are also kind, helpful and technically gifted _and_ instructive people in the Linux kernel community. There are even some who oscillate between both ends of that spectrum.

The question really is: can we harness the good to improve and innovate while also defeating the bad elements that are omnipresent? I think we do a pretty damn good job of it in the grand scheme of things. So when entire talks are dedicated to just how bad it is, that comes off as quite disingenuous. It isn't an accurate characterization of the broader community and the people who make it all work. And to speak so emphatically as if it is, that is a problem.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 2, 2018 0:22 UTC (Fri) by nivedita76 (guest, #121790) [Link]

You might want to reflect that perhaps your use of the term "snowflake" is a bit too automatic. The overlap between kind and helpful people and people who automatically pull out "snowflake" is nil.

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 8, 2018 11:05 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

I'm very sorry, but I think you have a language problem ...

I regularly use the term "black". The people I am talking about are not American, and would find the term "African" offensive.

Always remember the English and Americans are two peoples divided by a common language - and don't you dare translate the word "bum-bag" in my presence - the American equivalent is both offensive and sexist ... :-)

(It took me quite a while to realise what you saw as offensive ...)

Cheers,
Wol

Too many lords, not enough stewards

Posted Feb 2, 2018 12:50 UTC (Fri) by [email protected] (subscriber, #39252) [Link]

I have to say I agree. What you said reflects my own view quite well.

I also have to say that I feel personally offended by some statements made in the talk, even though I may agree with some points made in it too. Yes, I can get over this, but that doesn't particularly improve the taste in my mouth, so to speak.

Moreover, kernel code maintainers *are* contributors too. The majority of them actually contribute code changes, but even if they don't do that, maintaining a piece of kernel code is a significant contribution pretty much by itself, so positioning them against "contributors" as it was done in the talk doesn't appear to be fair enough.


Copyright © 2023, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds