September 2019 - Pharo-users

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by James Foster

One side-effect of the âCovenantâ discussion is that it is necessarily political, which is something that many (rightly, in my view) are trying to avoid. While I agree with most of the views expressed so far, I cringe because I anticipate that someone who disagrees will feel the compulsion to tell us that we are wrong, and things will go bad from there. I havenât reviewed the full email chain, but Iâve spent a few minutes searching pharo.org for âcode of conductâ and âcovenantâ and come up empty. Before we continue the discussion of how âwoke" (politically correct) we want to be, could someone confirm that this "dastardly deed" (imposing a progressive âCovenantâ without asking for agreement) was actually done? Maybe a troll has just dropped a fire cracker on us and is sitting back, enjoying watching us run around screaming! If there was, indeed, adoption of a âCovenantâ it should have been done by the board whose role âis to make decisions if in the future the community can't decide on a course of actionâ (https://pharo.org/about) I suggest that we suspend discussion of the politics of speech codes until we confirm that there is one for Pharo. At that point we politely (but pointedly) ask the board (publicly and privately) to explain what prompted the decision to adopt a Code (is it really necessary?) and how this one was selected. Note that part of the reason for limiting discussion is to avoid attracting attention of outsiders who will want to shape the discussion. Letâs stop kicking up dust for the moment! If we need a Code of Conduct, I respectfully suggest we start with ACM (https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics) which has what should be adequate anti-discrimination provisions (see 1.4 for a list of âunderrepresentedâ groups) to satisfy the progressives among us. James Foster

Sept. 18, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Richard O'Keefe

You just wrote what I didn't quite dare to say. Thank you. On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 11:29, Ramon Leon <ramon.leon(a)allresnet.com> wrote: > On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > > as I say the important issue is to provide safe > > spaces via explicit or implicit rules > > I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal opinions, > others may disagree. "Safe spaces" are bad things, not good things; the > world is not a safe space, it is not the responsibility of others to > provide one a feeling of safety in a an online community where people > merely exchange words. Words are not dangerous, you are already safe. If > you don't like what someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. Safe space > a euphemism for censorship and exclusion, people who want safe spaces want > to exclude other people who might express ideas or opinions that they > disagree with. Safe spaces are anti-free speech zones. > > They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than the > child for the world; they are inherently narcissistic. Intellectual > discourse is supposed to be challenging to your beliefs, you're supposed to > confront ideas you might not like or agree with and people you might have a > hard time getting along with. If you submit code to a technical forum you > should expect criticism and debate. Technical discussions should resolve > around the ideas being presented, not around the identities of those > involved, and ideas should always be open to critique and debate. I don't > care what one's sex or gender are or what color one's skin is or political > beliefs are; those things have no place in a technical forum. I watch these > groups to see discussions about technology like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside. > > It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no need for > a code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem intended only to > divide and punish for political ends. Maybe I'm just getting old, but the > younger generation is far too coddled and expectant of the world to adjust > to their feelings rather than learning how to deal with the world and > others who have different ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas. > > -- > RamÃ³n LeÃ³n > > >

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Ramon Leon

On 2019-09-17 4:26 p.m., Richard O'Keefe wrote: > I see the > so-called "Covenant" that we are discussing as another example of this urge to > micro-control other people.Â It has me nervously looking for the exit. I couldn't agree more. -- RamÃ³n LeÃ³n

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Ramon Leon

On 2019-09-17 2:34 p.m., Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > as I say the important issue is to provide safe > spaces via explicit or implicit rules I understand, I just disagree. These are of course my personal opinions, others may disagree. "Safe spaces" are bad things, not good things; the world is not a safe space, it is not the responsibility of others to provide one a feeling of safety in a an online community where people merely exchange words. Words are not dangerous, you are already safe. If you don't like what someone is saying, ignore them or mute them. Safe space a euphemism for censorship and exclusion, people who want safe spaces want to exclude other people who might express ideas or opinions that they disagree with. Safe spaces are anti-free speech zones. They are an attempt to prepare the world for the child rather than the child for the world; they are inherently narcissistic. Intellectual discourse is supposed to be challenging to your beliefs, you're supposed to confront ideas you might not like or agree with and people you might have a hard time getting along with. If you submit code to a technical forum you should expect criticism and debate. Technical discussions should resolve around the ideas being presented, not around the identities of those involved, and ideas should always be open to critique and debate. I don't care what one's sex or gender are or what color one's skin is or political beliefs are; those things have no place in a technical forum. I watch these groups to see discussions about technology like Pharo, Squeak, or Seaside. It's a rare thing to see anyone here being truly rude, there's no need for a code of conduct, it's a non solution to a non problem intended only to divide and punish for political ends. Maybe I'm just getting old, but the younger generation is far too coddled and expectant of the world to adjust to their feelings rather than learning how to deal with the world and others who have different ideas than they do. Safe spaces are bad ideas. -- RamÃ³n LeÃ³n

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Richard O'Keefe

Correspondents should be warned that the phrase "safe spaces" needs a trigger warning. I am not joking here. People who are genuinely sensitive to the perceptions and concerns of others really should avoid that concept because there are many people in whom it arouses strong negative feelings. Who indeed feel belittled and excluded by it. "Point of personal privilege..." I want this mailing list to serve the ends of advancing the development of Pharo, supporting the people who use Pharo in learning how to use it effectively, and more generally serving humanity by advancing the art of programming. The announcement of Grafoscopio and the help given when people have problems with it? Perfect example, hugely respect-worthy. There are plenty of others. Is there, in fact, enough of a problem here for us to NEED a special code, over and above say the ACM or BCS or whatever codes of ethics? At the department I used to be in, from time to time someone would raise an issue at a staff meeting, and we'd all start thinking about how to craft a rule to cover us. But the wisest of us would usually say "Do we actually need a rule for this? Is this happening a lot, or is it something rare that we can deal with informally?" Whenever he asked this, he was right. It *was* something rare that could be dealt with human to human. I was talking to a graduate student one day. He had a lot of commercial experience. I had been reading up about BPML and commented to him "it's as if businesses wanted to program people like machines". He responded, "yes they do." He was able to give me more examples than I really wanted from his own experience. I see the so-called "Covenant" that we are discussing as another example of this urge to micro-control other people. It has me nervously looking for the exit. On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 09:35, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas < offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: > Ramon, > > I'm not talking about the Covenant code in particular. Is not the only > code out there and as I say the important issue is to provide safe > spaces via explicit or implicit rules. Each community decides which is > the best way to be welcomed and respectful and how this is clear to its > members and outsiders. > > I don't think that technology and politics are so far away as usually > depicted, particularly in the Global North, as both deal with power > dynamics but technology embeds it in infrastructure. But seems that > politics is kind of a tainted word there and just bring it opens a > Pandora box. > > Cheers, > > Offray > > > On 17/09/19 11:38 a. m., Ramon Leon wrote: > > On 2019-09-17 6:28 a.m., Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > >> I'm pretty secure that Code of Conducts intent to provide secure > >> spaces beyond just digital spaces and go also into physical and face > >> to face ones. > > > > The code of conducts intent is to force identity politics into > > technical spaces in the name of social justice and to make someone > > feeling offended an actionable reason to go after the supposed > > offender; never mind that offense is taken rather than given. > > Nevermind that anyone can claim to be offended by just about anything. > > The goal is to get the project to agree to kick people out for > > violating the utterly vague and subjective rules. > > > > Here's some more quotes from the author of said code of conduct. > > > > "Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political > > document, and theyâre right." > > > > "I canât wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that itâs been > > infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah" > > > > "Meritocracy is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy > > propping up fragile cis het white men's egos" > > > > "Meritocracy is late stage patriarchy" > > > > "Why didnât anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi air time?" > > > > He is a radical left transgender activist, his intentions are purely > > political, the CoC is merely a means to an end and is used by him to > > setup situations in which he can cancel people in this new cancel > > culture. He wants to replace meritocracy with identity politics. This > > is the CoC that ran Linus out of Linux, a massive loss to the OS > > community. This is not a horse you want to hitch your wagon to Pharo. > > > > >

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas

Ramon, I'm not talking about the Covenant code in particular. Is not the only code out there and as I say the important issue is to provide safe spaces via explicit or implicit rules. Each community decides which is the best way to be welcomed and respectful and how this is clear to its members and outsiders. I don't think that technology and politics are so far away as usually depicted, particularly in the Global North, as both deal with power dynamics but technology embeds it in infrastructure. But seems that politics is kind of a tainted word there and just bring it opens a Pandora box. Cheers, Offray On 17/09/19 11:38 a.Â m., Ramon Leon wrote: > On 2019-09-17 6:28 a.m., Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: >> I'm pretty secure that Code of Conducts intent to provide secure >> spaces beyond just digital spaces and go also into physical and face >> to face ones. > > The code of conducts intent is to force identity politics into > technical spaces in the name of social justice and to make someone > feeling offended an actionable reason to go after the supposed > offender; never mind that offense is taken rather than given. > Nevermind that anyone can claim to be offended by just about anything. > The goal is to get the project to agree to kick people out for > violating the utterly vague and subjective rules. > > Here's some more quotes from the author of said code of conduct. > > "Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political > document, and theyâre right." > > "I canât wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that itâs been > infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah" > > "Meritocracy is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy > propping up fragile cis het white men's egos" > > "Meritocracy is late stage patriarchy" > > "Why didnât anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi air time?" > > He is a radical left transgender activist, his intentions are purely > political, the CoC is merely a means to an end and is used by him to > setup situations in which he can cancel people in this new cancel > culture. He wants to replace meritocracy with identity politics. This > is the CoC that ran Linus out of Linux, a massive loss to the OS > community.Â This is not a horse you want to hitch your wagon to Pharo. >

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Esteban Maringolo

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:28 AM Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas <offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: > For example, in Latin America I have not seen a huge movement about new pronouns and I don't know any of such for Spanish. The movement in LATAM started by the use of gender-neutral plurals, with some phonetic aberrations that cannot be even spelled to a more pronunciable alternative that seems to be sticking. Actually it's very easy to spot SJW because they overuse such language. There were some attempts to use it in pronouns, but apparently there is a language thing in Spanish that makes it harder to stick. > The raised concerns about a Code that states punishment without restoration or defense is an important one, > but also are the ones about technical communities where improper behavior is allowed because is not a "technical issue". It's simple to define improper behavior as something that is not aligned with the objective or purpose of the mailing list. > We may lock for examples in different communities to see which one fits better our own. It is, but the simpler the rules the simple to enforce them. E.g. I've been part of a team of 10 moderators in an online community of 40K+ members (with 1% active daily) for over two years now, we grew our own CoC over time, but it is not harmful as this "Covenant" proposed. And in that amount of members I can guarantee you (by experience) that there is a myriad of different opinions even within the "clusters" of those ruled by identity politics. > This is an important conversation to have, once it has been raised. Maybe, but as I said before, this mailing list, and the community in general is very civilized, even by old Internet standards. Regards, Esteban A. Maringolo

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Ramon Leon

On 2019-09-17 6:28 a.m., Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > I'm pretty secure that Code of Conducts intent to provide secure spaces beyond just digital spaces and go also into physical and face to face ones. The code of conducts intent is to force identity politics into technical spaces in the name of social justice and to make someone feeling offended an actionable reason to go after the supposed offender; never mind that offense is taken rather than given. Nevermind that anyone can claim to be offended by just about anything. The goal is to get the project to agree to kick people out for violating the utterly vague and subjective rules. Here's some more quotes from the author of said code of conduct. "Some people are saying that the Contributor Covenant is a political document, and theyâre right." "I canât wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that itâs been infiltrated by SJWs. Hahahah" "Meritocracy is just thinly veiled misogyny and white supremacy propping up fragile cis het white men's egos" "Meritocracy is late stage patriarchy" "Why didnât anyone punch the reporter giving the nazi air time?" He is a radical left transgender activist, his intentions are purely political, the CoC is merely a means to an end and is used by him to setup situations in which he can cancel people in this new cancel culture. He wants to replace meritocracy with identity politics. This is the CoC that ran Linus out of Linux, a massive loss to the OS community. This is not a horse you want to hitch your wagon to Pharo. -- RamÃ³n LeÃ³n

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] uFFI ExternalAddress challenges

by TomaÅ¾ Turk

Hi, > I donât know if there is support for that (I donât have the time to check it in detail now). > But, as a workaround, you may try > > - return a void* > > myFunction > ^self ffiCall: #(void* myFunction ( void ) ) > > - and then do the transformation yourself using Win32WideString>>#fromHandle: I checked, Win32WideString class>>#asExternalTypeOn: is defined, and it creates FFIExternalObjectType(Win32WideString) nicely with ^self ffiCall: #(Win32WideString myFunction ( void ) ) I also tried the other approach: ^self ffiCall: #(void* myFunction ( void ) ) and the transformation Win32WideString>>#fromHandle Interestingly, in both cases I get however I cannot pinpoint the reason for this. > What you are discovering here would be very useful as a section/chapter in > the uFFI booklet. Thanks for the invitation, yes, it would be nice to participate, I'll try to prepare something when I get to the bottom of the challenge :-) Thanks and best wishes, Tomaz

Sept. 17, 2019

Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

by Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas

Hi, For me, communities should be secure spaces in general for the people, not for the arguments, which means that constructive criticism should be addressed to the arguments in a community without personal attacks on the people there, as a general rule. I'm pretty secure that Code of Conducts intent to provide secure spaces beyond just digital spaces and go also into physical and face to face ones. When communities are small and from people who know each other, some explicit Code of Conduct maybe is not so needed, but at some point it would be. And in that context a wide discussion about which one could be selected and how is an important one. For example, in Latin America I have not seen a huge movement about new pronouns and I don't know any of such for Spanish. The raised concerns about a Code that states punishment without restoration or defense is an important one, but also are the ones about technical communities where improper behavior is allowed because is not a "technical issue". We may lock for examples in different communities to see which one fits better our own. This is an important conversation to have, once it has been raised. Cheers, Offray On 16/09/19 5:09 p.Â m., Richard O'Keefe wrote: > There was a point raised in the Ruby discussion (where my thoughts > about Matz changed from "inventor of a language that filled a > much-needed gap" to "really thoughtful so maybe I was wrong about > Ruby") which I think is sufficient reason for a major revision to the > Coraline Code.Â (For the record, I'm centre-left.) > > There is a process for punishing, but no process for restoration. > > Any morally acceptable code should be explicit that in the absence of > a legal conviction, no person may be banned or locked out for more > than some reasonable period, such as 2 years.Â If someone re-offends > after such a period, impose another temporary ban or lockout. > > Given the way the concept of "harassment" has been misused, it no > longer has any place in a code of conduct.Â Harassment these days is > whatever the percipient judges it to be.Â There was a Pogo cartoon in > which Pogo said "good morning" to a couple of other characters.Â > Afterwards, one of them said to the other "Pogo is so mealy-mouthed > that 'good morning' from him could be someone else's 'drop dead'."Â > Then that was satire.Â Today it's reality.Â One of my daughter's > friends was reported as harassing another woman.Â What did she do?Â > Sat quietly in the car, looking straight ahead, neither saying > anything nor moving.Â I know this because I was in the driver's seat > at the time.Â The same woman accused my wife of harassing her.Â How?Â > By sitting quietly in another room facing away from her.Â My wife's > offence was that if this woman looked at her through an internal > window, she could see her.Â I was sitting in the same room as the > complainer at the time.Â If just sitting quietly minding your own > business can be construed as harassment, NOBODY is safe. > > On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 06:59, Ramon Leon <ramon.leon(a)allresnet.com > <mailto:ramon.leon@allresnet.com>> wrote: > > On 2019-09-11 1:07 p.m., Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > > Based on the reaction earlier in the thread, I was expecting > something > > highly opinionated and polarizing, but it seems to boil down to: be > > professional and don't make it personal. While there are some > categories of > > people mentioned, it doesn't seem to make a value judgement > about them, but > > merely say that no one (including from those categories) will be > harassed > > inside the Pharo community. Seems pretty reasonable, unless I'm > missing > > something... > > You're missing what some progressives consider harassment these > days.Â These codes of conduct are being used around the net to > force progressive political ideology into technical communities, > the vague language is used to claim offense at any number of > things like misgendering, or refusing to use any number of made up > pronouns. Using inclusive language means using progressive > language like ze/zir, per/pers, ey/em, xe/xem if someone demands > it.Â This is language policing and a forcing of political ideology > into what should not be political.Â People are being kicked out of > communities for violating codes of conduct of the community > outside of the community, i.e. you said something on twitter or > facebook and now you're banned from an open source project for it > even though it had nothing to do with the project. > > The person who created this particular code of conduct is a well > known trans activist who first gets communities to accept the code > of conduct, and then stalks people around web to find anything > anywhere that might violate the vague code of conduct and then > tries to cancel them in every community they're a part of. If > you're not wary of this code of conduct, you're not paying > attention to how it's being used out there. > > Here's a few quotes from the author of this code of conduct. > > "The Ruby community has no moral compass. Just aphorisms and > self-congtatulatory, masturbatory bullshit."Â << after trying and > failing to kick the creator of Ruby out of the Ruby community. > > "If you're not fighting alongside us, or lending support, you're > STANDING IN OUR WAY. And I vow that I will walk right the fuck > over you.". > > "Fact: the solution to the problems in tech is not more tech. > Especially not more tech written by privileged, heads-in-the-sand > white dudes." > > "So many cis het white tech dudes with large platforms on here, > that not only don't engage in dialog on issues of social justice > but don't even elevate the voices of those of us who do, ignoring > POLITICS is a PRIVILEGE and I FUCKING SEE YOU." > > Here's a little history of this code of conduct and some other > popular communities. > > https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/974038-why-the-linux-coc-is-bad/ > > It's sad to see that Pharo has jumped onto this PC bandwagon, it > does not bode well for the community. > > -- > RamÃ³n LeÃ³n > >

Sept. 17, 2019