The GNOME Code of Conduct says: Be friendly. Be empathetic. Be respectful.
The GNOME Foundation signed an "open letter" accusing a software freedom activist of being "misogynist, ableist, and transphobic".
Questions:
(1) Is the letter in line with the GNOME Code of Conduct?
(2) Is it okay for the GNOME Foundation, as an organization, to sign something like that?
Personally I lean towards "no" on both questions, but I would like to hear what you think, especially GNOME developers.
@eliasr I wouldn't even go as far as mentioning the GNOME CoC, this is simply unacceptable from a human standpoint. A mob of people and organizations unjustly accusing someone of being "misogynist, ableist, and transphobic" which is an utter lie, and they know they are lying. It's a disgusting show of dishonesty.
@shiba I agree that the letter was very unfortunate, to put it mildly.
What I'm wondering now is what to do now, in the situation we have. All those people (and organizations!) did sign that, and now I need to communicate with them after that.
My thought regarding the CoC in this case was that, by looking at things from that point of view, that could be a way of making the people who signed the letter reflect on what they have done.
What do you think? What should we do now?
@eliasr I seriously have no idea. I mean I'm angry, I'm very much furious about this, and it's really hard just to keep my tone accusatory but not offensive.
A lot of the people on that list honestly believe they are fighting some "Holy War", so whatever offense they commit they feel justified. That being said, pointing out the wrongdoings might still help someone gain a little perspective, so if anything it's not time wasted. Just expect to be marginalized somewhere, though. 😕
> A lot of the people on that list honestly believe they are fighting
> some "Holy War", so whatever offense they commit they feel justified.
Yes, that's the impression I got also.
For example, if I say personal attacks should be avoided, they answer that they agree with that in general but that in this particular case it's so important to get what they want that they make an exception. They throw principles out the window and they think that's acceptable "for the greater good".
