• GitHub tells user to remove the word "retarded" from his repo, the user proceeds to change it to "gi
    137 replies, posted
what does git have in common with gamergate shit?
Yeah, I think I'll switch over to Bitbucket now..
[QUOTE=Mattk50;48358211]they also took down all the forks of this project because the original had such *horrible offensive language*. Github has been taking down projects they dont like on whims of their developers for awhile now. Yeah dont use github.[/QUOTE] Lmao. Seeing as how most employers for a software engineering position expect you to have a GitHub profile and consider it as your portfolio, I'm going to say you're insane.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360060]Except the word "retard" isn't a protected form of speech and if censoring a word was illegal the FCC would be in for a world of trouble. (for obvious reason) Beyond that Github could legally change all text to just read "bark, bark, bark," repeat, ect, deleting all other content in the process and that's perfectly within [I]their[/I] rights. Beyond that, my suggestion of simply implementing a good community policy regarding how you conduct your self on [I]their[/I] service is perfectly within[I] their [/I]right as well and it's more restrictive than simple word bans. [B]Facepunch[/B] has more "censorship" by your contextual definition than github does, and you're posting here aren't you? Just because there are rules about how much of an asshole you can be doesn't mean your freedoms are being stripped from you one by one in the name of creating a totalitarian thought police ran society.[/QUOTE] I never said anything about freedom of speech or of any laws, I said it was censorship. Is that illegal? Certainly not. What they can legally do is not the point, the point is what I believe they should and shouldn't do. Facepunch's rules are also a very poor example to compare this to, the context and circumstances are entirely different and create more of a grey area, out right calling someone a retard in an open discussion is a different circumstance than making an off hand comment about how it would be retarded to make a certain mistake in the read me of this project. At no point am I saying either is creating a "totalitarian thought police ran society" I'm not arguing in extremes, I am saying that the website is threatening his project because of an off hand comment and that he should not just accept the shit the site is giving him, for all intensive purposes his work is being censored for absurd and minor reasons. And while the site is well within their legal rights to do so, I don't believe they should for sake of the freedom of their users. Of course there are things that cross the line into the areas of hate speech and at that point no one could blame the site for taking it down, this how ever I believe has not crossed that line in the slightest. [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Fourier;48360474]what does git have in common with gamergate shit?[/QUOTE] Nothing really, but before this instance gamergate's "write up" was removed from github for the usual claims about it.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360060]Except the word "retard" isn't a protected form of speech and if censoring a word was illegal the FCC would be in for a world of trouble. (for obvious reason) Beyond that Github could legally change all text to just read "bark, bark, bark," repeat, ect, deleting all other content in the process and that's perfectly within [I]their[/I] rights. Beyond that, my suggestion of simply implementing a good community policy regarding how you conduct your self on [I]their[/I] service is perfectly within[I] their [/I]right as well and it's more restrictive than simple word bans. [B]Facepunch[/B] has more "censorship" by your contextual definition than github does, and you're posting here aren't you? Just because there are rules about how much of an asshole you can be doesn't mean your freedoms are being stripped from you one by one in the name of creating a totalitarian thought police ran society.[/QUOTE] Nobody said there was any [I]governmental[/i] censorship. Nobody said what GitHub did is (or should be) a crime. We just don't like what they did and find it immoral, and the common definition of censorship isn't restricted to governmental action and includes this. Of course this isn't gonna turn into a massive boycott that forces GitHub to change their policies or face irrelevance. Your comparison with Facepunch doesn't hold because Facepunch is a community and a project hosting service is a platform - it doesn't regularly have global moderation. Though I personally don't like the relevant rules here either. But they're just not enough to make me leave. [QUOTE=Venom Mk III;48359882]The whole thing could have been avoided and resolved quicker if a more mature decision was made in the first place, such as emailing the lead maintainer, which makes miles more sense given the sensitivity of the issue. [editline]3rd August 2015[/editline] Sometimes, people don't actually want the issue resolved, they just wish to draw attention to it when it's not always the right thing to do. The "bikeshed" concept is one of those things.[/QUOTE] Public shaming was kind of the point. If you believe that the developer community in general should be intolerant of certain views, and actively exclude people who hold them, then bringing them to public attention is exactly what you should be doing. And why does it matter that they didn't contribute? You don't need to even have any domain knowledge to criticise something on ethical grounds. [QUOTE=Tamschi;48360195]She promotes it elsewhere and for other purposes. For example [URL="http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sn4lnd"]O'Reilly OSCON's social media manager recently used it to block all those people on the list[/URL] for the duration of the convention after some criticised her doing an anti-harassment talk while being one of the worst examples in that regard herself. It only checks if you follow at least two(?) people she disagrees with (every single one of which is utterly benign compared to her and probably still relatively nice compared to the average Twitter user), so the list has easily over 90% false-positives. IGDA also promoted the list as one of "worst harassers" for a while. This was while their own Puerto Rican chairman was on the list. He complained about it and subsequently had to explain to a ton of people that he isn't a misogynist. Aside from the obvious censorship issues with a deceptively advertised tool promoted to a large number of people (Yes, I do somewhat regularly stumble across someone who has me blocked with no interaction. This did include [URL="https://twitter.com/raspberry_pi"]Raspberry Pi[/URL] for a while.), the blocks on Twitter work bidirectionally so you can't follow any accounts using it, can't view their timeline*, and can't retweet, favourite or reply to any of their tweets if you happen to get on her bad side by association. [/QUOTE] Do you really think there are blockbot users who don't know how it works and who it targets? By your definition these targets are benign, but I'd say anyone who uses the blockbot knows who they are and [I]doesn't[/I] feel that way.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48361603]Public shaming was kind of the point. If you believe that the developer community in general should be intolerant of certain views, and actively exclude people who hold them, then bringing them to public attention is exactly what you should be doing. And why does it matter that they didn't contribute? You don't need to even have any domain knowledge to criticise something on ethical grounds.[/QUOTE] Everything is situational. If you want to publicly shame someone who contributes to a project, I'm sure every maintainer will tell you they don't want a storm on an issue tracker meant for bugs. Use social media instead, it was meant for that purpose. Publicly shaming someone online also doesn't help them understand what they did wrong most of the time, all they hear is a collection of angry voices, and they won't learn anything from that. In fact it can make the situation worse, especially when you get an around 50/50 split of angry people. I personally find it to be really counterproductive, but I'll admit there is a place for it.
[QUOTE=Venom Mk III;48361974]Everything is situational. If you want to publicly shame someone who contributes to a project, I'm sure every maintainer will tell you they don't want a storm on an issue tracker meant for bugs. Use social media instead, it was meant for that purpose. Publicly shaming someone online also doesn't help them understand what they did wrong most of the time, all they hear is a collection of angry voices, and they won't learn anything from that. In fact it can make the situation worse, especially when you get an around 50/50 split of angry people. I personally find it to be really counterproductive, but I'll admit there is a place for it.[/QUOTE] I totally believe that using the issue tracker was wrong for this. Past that though, there is, again, two sides: 1. I'd argue that most of these people are looking to be mad. They don't necessarily want a solution to their problems, because if that happens, they lose some ability to complain. They're not looking to have a discussion, because rational discussion doesn't have the same rush as being militant. 2. At the same time, rational discussions only work when one side is willing to listen to the other. [quote][B][8/2/2015 7:30:50 PM] wauterboi[/B]: That's what I'm seeing in that thread for GitHub. They're more keen on throwing fits and not trying to talk things out rationally. [B][8/2/2015 7:31:36 PM] wauterboi:[/B] They're trying to read too far into what meh was saying and trying to say he's a homophobic sympathizer and trying to defend oppression, and that's why it bothers me. It's not a discussion. [B][8/2/2015 7:31:52 PM] wauterboi:[/B] Nothing that guy will ever say will ever make him happy, and he's not even the transphobic person in question. [B][8/2/2015 7:33:30 PM | Edited 7:34:00 PM] The Hamster Alliance:[/B] Talking things out rationally works better when other people listen and your opinion is taken seriously. When you're fighting upwards, you're often not taken seriously, or given time to talk; and when you do it's merely a niceity, they're humoring you, without any intention to enact or truly consider anything you've said. In those instances, especially when you don't have a lot of opportunities to really voice your side to a broad audience, being loud gets you the attention. "The squeaky wheel gets the oil" so to speak. It's a valid tactic in certain instances. [B][8/2/2015 7:33:41 PM] The Hamster Alliance:[/B] I don't know enough about either of the things you've linked to say one way or the other.[/quote] I still don't think it's an excuse, though, and again I feel these people are only looking to be angry without serious intentions of contributing.
something something git has been used as an alternate to retarted/stupid for many years, way before GitHub was even thought of.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48361603][...] Do you really think there are blockbot users who don't know how it works and who it targets? By your definition these targets are benign, but I'd say anyone who uses the blockbot knows who they are and [I]doesn't[/I] feel that way.[/QUOTE] Considering quite a few companies and people removed it (and some apologized for targeting the wrong users)? Yes, I think that's pretty much a given. A lot of the places that initially promoted it didn't mention how the list is created either and/or [I]largely[/I] misrepresented the group it targets, so there are most definitely a lot of people who were misinformed from that too.
Just an fyi. The new code of conduct is against racism and sexism* *Unless you're male, white, and straight [url]https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct[/url] [URL]http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/[/URL] [quote]Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: - ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’[/quote]
Why do SJWs and overly-PC people still have a voice of any kind? All they ever do is discriminate against others and spread their own brand of hate.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;48364463]Why do SJWs and overly-PC people still have a voice of any kind? All they ever do is discriminate against others and spread their own brand of hate.[/QUOTE] Because they hide behind "we're doing good, down with white man patriarchy" and everyone's like ooh I want to be a part of something good too and then they join because ignorance.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;48364463]Why do SJWs and overly-PC people still have a voice of any kind? All they ever do is discriminate against others and spread their own brand of hate.[/QUOTE] How do you suggest they not have a voice? Are you suggesting they should shut up? "Their own brand of hate" straight up acknowledges how other forms of hate exist and they have a voice, shouldn't the SJWs? They have a right to complain and voice their opinions on everything. Why their voices seem louder than the rest and why their complaints and opinions seem to bring about (both positive and negative) change more quickly is another matter entirely and I think that is what you mean. Why are they being catered to or at least why do things change when they complain? I don't really have an answer, but in the end it is important to me to be clear on issues. (Also I don't believe in a SJW/PC-gone-mad cabal/conspiracy/organisation/cell formation, but I had to use it to make my reply easier to type out).
[QUOTE=Fetret;48364607]How do you suggest they not have a voice? Are you suggesting they should shut up? "Their own brand of hate" straight up acknowledges how other forms of hate exist and they have a voice, shouldn't the SJWs? They have a right to complain and voice their opinions on everything. Why their voices seem louder than the rest and why their complaints and opinions seem to bring about (both positive and negative) change more quickly is another matter entirely and I think that is what you mean. Why are they being catered to or at least why do things change when they complain? I don't really have an answer, but in the end it is important to me to be clear on issues. (Also I don't believe in a SJW/PC-gone-mad cabal/conspiracy/organisation/cell formation, but I had to use it to make my reply easier to type out).[/QUOTE] I'm suggesting people quit listening to them and see them for what they are: Racist and sexist monsters. Why make this black and white? 'Other forms of hate' doesn't mean anti-SJW. Everyone has an opinion of something, but if you start to group opinions together like that they can suddenly hold more weight than they should. It turns into a contest with a vocal minority.
[QUOTE=lavacano;48358437]I'm not even sure GIMP did that on purpose (it stands for "GNU Image Manipulation Program", which is a pretty unimaginative name). And even if they did, I think they would have meant BDSM gimp, not "I have only one leg" gimp.[/QUOTE] Probably what happened is they just called it GNU Image Manipulation Program and then just kept it for the memorable acronym GIMP has a lot of dubious and strange humor like that, such as the toilet paper print size template
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;48365424]Probably what happened is they just called it GNU Image Manipulation Program and then just kept it for the memorable acronym GIMP has a lot of dubious and strange humor like that, such as the toilet paper print size template[/QUOTE] [img]http://orig03.deviantart.net/3b9e/f/2014/090/a/b/peppers__by_bbtdgfan882-d7cfdaz.png[/img]
- this.Text = "WebM for [censored]"; + this.Text = "WebM for bakas";
[QUOTE=Thlis;48364433]Just an fyi. The new code of conduct is against racism and sexism* *Unless you're male, white, and straight [url]https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct[/url] [URL]http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/[/URL][/QUOTE] Wow, fuck everything about that.
I don't really see the problem here If GitHub wants their community to be free of, let's be honest, completely unnecessary derogatory language then that's their choice. I don't see why people feel the need to swear in their own codebase. It's like making a work of art then leaving a muddy bootprint on it. There are things that don't matter, like in games where swearing isn't out of context, but this is a simple tool - you don't need to offend your users?
[QUOTE=Thlis;48364433]Just an fyi. The new code of conduct is against racism and sexism* *Unless you're male, white, and straight [url]https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct[/url] [URL]http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/[/URL][/QUOTE] Well that leaves little room for doubt about the current state of github's policies.
[QUOTE=Trumple;48368065]I don't really see the problem here If GitHub wants their community to be free of, let's be honest, completely unnecessary derogatory language then that's their choice.[/QUOTE] First thing first, they should change their name, it's derogatory. [QUOTE]git (ɡɪt) [I]n[/I] 1. a contemptible person, often a fool 2. a bastard[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=undu;48369785]First thing first, they should change their name, it's derogatory.[/QUOTE] Not sure if you're joking but git is the name of the version control system they host.
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;48361073]Lmao. Seeing as how most employers for a software engineering position expect you to have a GitHub profile and consider it as your portfolio, I'm going to say you're insane.[/QUOTE] The contents of this thread proves they shouldnt, or github should get it's fucking shit together and stop being retarded.
[video=youtube;WoGDPwkAkaQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoGDPwkAkaQ[/video]
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;48361073]Lmao. Seeing as how most employers for a software engineering position expect you to have a GitHub profile and consider it as your portfolio, I'm going to say you're insane.[/QUOTE] You can use bitbucket, man
[QUOTE=Skipcast;48369851]Not sure if you're joking but git is the name of the version control system they host.[/QUOTE] I'm aware, GIMP is also another program that has a "derogatory" name. I'm just pointing at the hypocrisy of Github's stance.
[QUOTE]Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: - ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’[/QUOTE] How ironic. They ignore issues that affect people of a certain color and gender and only address those of people they deem worthy, thus making so-called "marginalised" people privileged when it comes to assistance against harassment. How appalling that it's become such a common mindset in the social justice scene. Being bigoted is seen as being the "right thing to do" now, people just gobble up this idiocy in order to seem progressive instead of actually putting some thought into it. This is what I'd call being retarded, but that would be doing a disservice to handicapped people.
[QUOTE=Skipcast;48369851]Not sure if you're joking but git is the name of the version control system they host.[/QUOTE] It's funny because git was named git since it was meant to be the "easy" version control protocol aka for gits.
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;48370466]I've been through 2 software development jobs without a GitHub page, there are alternate ways of showing proficiency and contributions you know.[/QUOTE] Totally. You don't need to be a good open source dev to be a good dev.
[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;48369550]They overreach. There's a very thin line on this only effecting GitHub and allowing them to target you for personal opinions off site; which let's be honest people have already demonstrated the will to do and now GitHub is just giving them clear justification.[/QUOTE] Did I miss something? I'm confused, you're saying that people [presumably GitHub employees?] have already demonstrated the will to target you [in what way? your GitHub repos?] for opinions outside of GitHub? If this sounds sarcastic it's not, I feel like I've missed some detail here
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.