Did anyone read this : https://contributor-covenant.org/ve... ?

I think it makes sense, that's what I'd expect any professional environment to enforce, sane workplace and all that, I don't see what the deal is.
It doesn't say you have to accept anything from anyone, it's just about not rejecting only on a racial, gender, etc... basis and to not be a dick in a general way. That's part of what HR is supposed to do in companies.

The whole thing applies to both maintainers and contributors.
Sure people are gonna try to abuse of the thing but that would be the case for anything.

What are your thoughts?

PS: the master/slave thing was bullshit IMO it's just a hierarchical construct in an engineering context.

The problem with the Contributor Covenant CoC is not with its purpose, but with its wording. On the surface it looks okay because of the positive language it uses, but it enforces rules that are very vaguely expressed and can be interpreted arbitrarily.

In practice, that code of conduct can be used (and it's already been used) as a weapon to deplatform and silence people that you don't like based purely on your own interpretation of what constitutes “harassment”, “unwelcome sexual attention” or “other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting”.

You and any contributions you make can be banned and vetoed because they “are not aligned to this Code of Conduct”, meaning that you can be banned from any project subject to the Contributor Covenant for any reason, given the necessary amount of language gymnastics, drama and PR nightmare, even if you didn't really do anything wrong.

@ethernetzero yeah, that's clearly possible. I mean vague or not there will always be loopholes allowing people to abuse of the code, it happens everyday with civil and criminal laws or even professional codes (of rule) everywhere.

@Hallelouia You have a point, but in this particular case, the CoC is already being used against wrong thinkers. The first thing the SJWs did after Linus' departure and adoption of the CoC by the Linux project was go after Theodore Ts'o, one of the main contributors, accusing him of being a rape apologist based on some bullshit interpretation of something he said in the past.

SJWs have been targeting him and Linus for a few years now, and it seems they finally got Linus out. The Linux project already had a Code Of Conflict instead of a Code Of Conduct, but it favored code quality over interpersonal relations because that's the purpose of the project, contributing good code. If you have a problem with what someone told you, you should be functional enough to work things out between you and that person. Banning people from contributing code because muh feefees is just ridiculous.

@ethernetzero I was wondering why are we not ignoring SJWs and then I realized that they're not targeting a group but the individual and there's no escaping them...

@Hallelouia Yeah, I'm really confused as to how have we ended up in this situation, where everything is getting politicized and scrutinized for every little tiny detail to be offended about. It's insane.

@Hallelouia we can always throw them screaming from helicopters.