Dealin with Social Justice Warriors - Re: Truth matters when writing software and selecting leaders

[Jean Louis]

* Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) <936-846-2769@kylheku.com> [2021-03-26 19:02]:
> Those incidents could have been "innocent" in the sense that
> the person was really just working on their own and actually member
> of [FOOBAR group], just with a really oboxious personality and
> way of thinking.
> 
> The conspiracy-like theory of mine that I'm referring to is that the
> submitter is not actually a member of any [FOOBAR group]. The claim is fake,
> used by some nefarious agency to push rogue commits.
> 
> To make it crystal clear, I am not in any way "FOOBAR-phobic" or
> whatever.

There are two different viewpoints on who is a member of a group:

- as a registerd member, like let us say elected, registered, voted,
  member, somewhere registered in a list;

- as a moral member or member by self-deterministic association to a
  group, motivated by purposes of the group;

One may belong to one of the above lists without belonging to other,
or may be in both lists.

Free software broader community including those people using free
software without knowing what it is, was since decades a friendly
group, with common issues where majority members, either by
self-deterministic association or as registered members -- had goals
of being united by what is common to the group, and that was software
and activities related to software.

When other politics and other subjects which are not common to the
broader larger group of people are introduced and focused, that is
what causes division, hate, defamations, rumours, and possibly wars in
our human society.

One good part, maybe one fifth of people participating are turning
unconsciously or consciously to the direction where the wind blows,
without feeling of repercussion or understanding the outcomes of their
actions

Thus it is very important to point out those individuals, and not
groups, but individuals who are inciting other people to divide, as
they benefit or gain to their private probably psychopathic purposes.

> Let me articulate the crazy conspiracy theory more precisely: some
> nefarious agencies are injecting animosity into free software
> communities in order to create disruption which will have the result
> of bringing changes into projects, such that the leadership of those
> projects becomes more docile and pliable in the face of pressure
> from those nefarious agencies. Nefarious agencies could be
> corporations, governments (local and foreign), you name it.

It is good that you see patterns. We are in matrix as in the
movie. Large corporations are backed up by even larger powers who know
how to influence the world, create more or less of any subject in the
world, they know to press a button Y that will destroy the subject X
in foreseeable future.

> I think the most level-headed attitude to have is represented in that
> "no code of conduct". https://nocodeofconduct.com/

Yes. It is practical, it works well without it. Yet Code of Conduct is
like code of basic agreements that relate to specific group, in itself
a Code of Conduct can be good thing. Problems come with enforcements
and focus on negativities. Both the node code of conduct and code of
conduct can be abuse to extremes. Groups attract people that are group
alike, with or without code of conduct. A bad group can have a good
code of conduct and still engage in activities contrary to their own
code of conduct. A no code of conduct can attract both good and bad
people whatever good and bad means for the reader. People in groups
will attract people similar people to join.

Greater problem with those groups maintaining the Code of Conduct is
the abuse of power where individuals instead of advising participants,
rather start publicly shaming others, accusing, defaming, harassing
and that evolves into bullying that is all justified by whatever
established code of conducts. It is perversion of authorities,
perversion of power and perversion of justice. This kind of people
enjoy in doing so as justice is not present in those groups. Rarely
somebody will decide to sue the other person for defamation,
criminal accusations, and similar. But they should IMHO.

Code of conducts are not legally binding to anything. They represent
wished behavior by the management of particular organization, but
cannot be imposed. The organization or group imposing the code of
conduct should put a great care to abide by the law first and
foremost. That is the missing part of all of Codes of
Conducts.

Somebody steps little beyond the Code of Conduct, and then the
harassment starts beyond what is considered decent human behavior,
incitements to criminal acts and harm to other organizations and other
people.

Please read:

Shawn James,  Black Freelance Writer: How to Deal With Social Justice Warriors 
or SJWs
https://shawnsjames.blogspot.com/2017/09/how-to-deal-with-social-justice.html

How to deal with SJWs – a conservative’s guide | The Conservative Woman
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/how-to-deal-with-sjws-a-conservatives-guide/

The 2015 Social Justice Kittens Calendar @ AMERICAN DIGEST
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/driveby/the_2015_social_justice_k.php

I am Offended: How The Social Justice Warriors Made Thinking Dangerous - 
Inspired Human Development
https://inspiredhumandevelopment.com/blog/social-justice-warriors

The Totalitarian Doctrine of "Social Justice Warriors" | Observer
https://observer.com/2016/02/the-totalitarian-doctrine-of-social-justice-warriors/

> Projects must put up a barrier against allowing manipulation via
> irrelevant politics.

See above.

> All decisions must be purely technical. Nobody must be allowed to
> manipulate technical decisions, like what software changes are
> approved, by means of gender identity politics, race or anything
> else. This is necessary for software security and the survival of
> free software as such.
> 

Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns