Hacker News Reader

Comment by _pmf_ | Hacker News Reader

“The behavior of any bureaucratic organization can best be understood by assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies.”

― Robert Conquest

View on HN

The relevance of the quote you've posted might be less obvious than you think it is.

It's relevant because this wave of CoC attacks on open source projects was started by someone who has literally said "I can’t wait for the mass exodus from Linux now that it’s been infiltrated by SJWs."[1], in reference to the kernel adopting their CoC.

This person obviously does not care about the people who contribute to the kernel.

They wrote the "Contributor Covenant"[2], which is what the kernel (among tons of other projects) adopted.

1: https://twitter.com/coralineada/status/1041441155874009093 2: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/

That quotation is a joke, state in irony in a thread about how much abuse someone is receiving for even proposing a change to the rules.

It's disingenuous in the extreme to present that as a tweet that honestly reflected a goal, and anyone who takes a second to click "show thread" and looks around will see it's a tweet made in jest.

Actions like this are misinformation. The question I'm left asking is, "Did folknor know this is not what the tweet meant, and just doesn't care? Or did folknor just not bother to check if this reference was meaningful and valid?" Neither shines a positive light on this argument.

You're absolutely correct, I just took the tweet at face value, and did not bother to investigate the tweet, or any followups, at all.

I still haven't, and simply accept your statement that it's a joke, stated in irony.

I do not use twitter, and do not allow javascript. I've never clicked "Show thread" on Twitter. I had to jump through hoops to find the tweet, and to be able to copy+paste the text of it.

I just remembered it from a different thread here on HN where someone linked to an article that had a screenshot of it.

I appreciate your candor. Thank you. If you're unwilling to vet a source due to safety concerns, I completely understand. But please consider next time if it's then safe or responsible to use that source. The cognitive bias and mechanics of memory in humans is such that even if it's discredited, humans can often retain only trace aspects of the discourse which can strengthen later disinformation. We see examples of this in research around the "Mandela Effect" and it profoundly affects how communicators approach establishing truth in the face of fiction.

Your story here is an example of this effect in play in a more dire situation, when someone presents deliberate (as opposed to accidental) misinformation. You were manipulated, and subsequently passed that manipulation forward. Now everyone here will be more likely to believe the misinformed story, even me if I'm not careful.

It's difficult to say that @coralineada started the wave . . ._but_ she certainly was an influencing factor in the most recent malignancy. To @folknor and others of like mind, take heart. People are noticing the trend as well. Just take a look at sqlite's coc (https://sqlite.org/codeofconduct.html). The point here, I believe, is that people are becoming aware of the absurdity of the constraints that are being placed on certain FOSS communities. What @coralineada 'started' is certainly having unintended consequences as it would relate to her.

To be honest, I'm surprised her tweet hasn't been deleted and that she hasn't been ousted by the community as being a SJW troll.

> This person obviously does not care about the people who contribute to the kernel.

Double-check the source and followup; I think you have misinterpreted the intent of the linked tweet (sarcasm travels poorly over text media, especially one that enforces a curtailed message length).

Your uncharitable interpretation of the tweet you linked cannot be read as accidental.

Yes it can, when you realise the fact that I linked to it, and that anyone who cares enough about the subject can investigate and apparently instantly realise that my face-value interpretation of the tweet was entirely mistaken.

Then it should be obvious that it was an accident. If not, I would not have linked a source that instantly disproves what I said.

> anyone who cares enough about the subject can investigate

So you cared enough about it to post a comment framing them as an attacker on Linux, but not enough to verify your interpretation?

You state that you learned of it from someone who "linked to an article that had a screenshot of it". The only way you could have not arrived at the correct interpretation is if you also took at face value misinformation presented to you in the surrounding context. Which in turn suggests you spend time uncritically accepting such misinformation.

You may consider that an accident. I do not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com