"tell that to people murdered in crusades or by inquisition, or any other religious bs"
If you actually read the rule you'll find such conduct contrary to it.
SQLite creator crucified after code of conduct warns devs to love God, and not kill, commit adultery, steal, curse...
Open-source database SQLite has told its developers it expects them to follow Christ, love chastity, clothe the naked, and not murder, steal, nor sleep with their colleagues' spouses. That's the upshot of a somewhat untypical code of conduct that the widely used project has published online. While most code of conducts take an …
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 12:15 GMT Raedwald Bretwalda
Not so hasty, fellow atheist.
As TFA and the CoC itself says, those rules are taken from The Rule of St Benedict, which was (and stiil is) the Rule followed by Benedictine Monks (and those who would emulate them), not general rules for Christians. Naturally, Monks held themselves to stricter standards than general members of the population.
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 14:20 GMT Jtom
Blaming the Crusades or the Inquisition on religion is short-sighted and inaccurate. At those times, the governments also controlled the religion. The Crusades were European governments warring against an invader who took land in the Middle East that they once held (by virtue of taking it from others). They used religion as an excuse, but it would have happened even if Caesar were still running things.
The Inquisition was the result of European governments taking back parts of Europe conquered by invading North Africans, the Moors. Again, it would have happened with or without religion.
There is only one religion that can be interpreted as calling for the takeover of all the Earth by whatever means necessary. You can say whatever you want about that philosophy, but for real death and destruction, you have to examine governments that had no religious underpinnings. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, alone, killed many times more people than all religions combined.
-
Wednesday 24th October 2018 18:03 GMT Daniel von Asmuth
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
" the governments also controlled the religion"
Actually, no. Many rulers of yore have controlled religions to increase their power, sometimes claiming divinity for themselves.
"There is only one religion that can be interpreted as calling for the takeover of all the Earth by whatever means necessary. "
Yes, that is the God of Moses, Abraham, Jesus & Mohammed. Popes were the only religious leaders to control governments, instead of the other way around.
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 08:48 GMT jmch
The 'general behaviour' parts of the code are good, and are indeed taking just those would make an ace general-purpose code of conduct. (of course they can all be boiled down to 'be nice to others')
The overtly religious points verge between stupidly patronising to plain weird.
BUT the real disqualifiers for this list to be upheld as an exemplary code of conduct are:
54/55 - "Speak no useless words or words that move to laughter. / Do not love much or boisterous laughter." Come on, laughter is the best medicine and a sense of humour is extremely important.
63. "Love chastity." No. Just, no. (OK I understand it might be directed towards SQL nerds where it anyway does not apply.... but still, NO)
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 09:39 GMT eldakka
63. "Love chastity." No. Just, no. (OK I understand it might be directed towards SQL nerds where it anyway does not apply.... but still, NO)
So not so much a rule to follow, but a piece of advice given to help soften the blow of the inevitable consequences of becoming a (SQL) nerd?
I'll get my coat.
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
Wednesday 24th October 2018 11:26 GMT Anonymous Coward
"63. "Love chastity." No. Just, no. (OK I understand it might be directed towards SQL nerds where it anyway does not apply.... but still, NO)"
The whole point of SQL is to join things up and to make new things come out as a result. Inner join, outer join...the whole language is riddled with innuendo.
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 10:16 GMT Anonymous Coward
"I mean it was tested for many centuries and it worked."
You should know how monastic orders could hate each other and work hard to damage the others and trying to make their own rich, very rich and poweful. For example, the Humiliates order, which adopted St. Benedict rule, became very rich with the production on wool fabrics, and, well, didn't really follow the rule... It was suppressed after they tried to kill the Archbishop of Milan - who was trying to put a stop to their abuses.
Their properties were given to other orders, including the one running the school I attended four centuries later (built in an old monastery) - they got it to run a school for the poor and the orphans.... just it became very quickly a school for the rich... usually founders words became just words soon after the founder was dead.
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 10:06 GMT Nick Kew
Code of conduct in any online[1] community in our time:
- Nice idea. Or seems so.
- Nightmare in reality as it gets weaponised to enforce an Agenda, usually totalitarian.
Looks just like rather a lot of religious teachings.
I'm tempted to say Good On Him for calling out the nonsense, if it was indeed a reaction to (against) a modern form of repression.
BTW, we have a contrasting case of Larry Wall here. Some bits of God-bothering around Perl, but not so in-your-face as to be offensive or feel exclusive to a non-christian like me.
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 12:49 GMT ibmalone
Code of conduct in any online[1] community in our time:
- Nice idea. Or seems so.
- Nightmare in reality as it gets weaponised to enforce an Agenda, usually totalitarian.
Earlier today I found myself typing out point 2. for an email list I frequent, then thought better of it. There is a great way to use a code of conduct and a bit of authority to shut down opposition. Simply ignore criticism until opponents get frustrated, then accuse anyone who lets exasperation creep into their tone of violating the code of conduct. The exact message I had thought of replying to contained approximately: "stop trying to silence people, I suggest you read the code of conduct", with a follow-up repeating the suggestion.
A code of conduct is useful, you need something to stop genuine abuse, but it needs to be implemented in an even-handed and constructive way.
-
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 09:42 GMT eldakka
Re: I have a code of conduct
With respect, the only issue with your one liner is it's self-breaching. By telling other people not to do something you're telling them (trying to tell them) how to behave, which the line itself forbids...
That only applies if the OP tries to apply it to other people.
This appears to be the OPs personal code of conduct, not a code of conduct the OP is enforcing on others.
-
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 05:23 GMT T. F. M. Reader
Re: I have a code of conduct
@Chris King: I think along the lines of "Use common sense and don't be a dick towards other people", but these days Equality & Diversity seems to need a manual and a mandatory training course before it is taken seriously.
And you'd fail the training course for you've used the word "dick" which is both offensive and sexist. Where is your common sense?
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 10:17 GMT Nick Kew
Re: I have a code of conduct
I think one or two commentards may be missing the point. It is my code of conduct, not one I try to impose on others.
Speaking as someone who immediately upvoted your code of conduct and also enjoyed the first response lightheartedly contradicting you, I don't think you have too much to worry about.
But it's true, subtlety and irony can be lost here. I've had two posts saying the same thing on the same thread in a Reg group, one attracted lots of downvotes, the other lots of upvotes. Commentards[1] are fickle, and you play with their expectations at your peril.
[1] And moderators, which is worse - though a lot rarer here.
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 09:45 GMT eldakka
Re: I have a code of conduct
@Chris King: I think along the lines of "Use common sense and don't be a dick towards other people", but these days Equality & Diversity seems to need a manual and a mandatory training course before it is taken seriously.
And you'd fail the training course for you've used the word "dick" which is both offensive and sexist. Where is your common sense?
Maybe could use the word asshole, or the medically correct version of that word, rectum. That is not sexist since everyone has one, and using rectum, at least, isn't offensive unless one tries to find offence in a technical term. In which case, fuck em.
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 10:23 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I have a code of conduct
using rectum, at least, isn't offensive
I'd consider it highly offensive to use any rectum other than one's own. Or indeed to use my own for any purpose other than disposing waste from the body. So please keep it out of your CoC.
Damn, I expect that's offensive to someone.
-
-
Tuesday 23rd October 2018 13:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I have a code of conduct
"And you'd fail the training course for you've used the word "dick" which is both offensive and sexist. Where is your common sense?"
this has literally never happened. people dont use the word "dick" because they're worried it's offensive or sexist (debatable on both counts). people dont use it because its not suitable business language. you dont need to invoke your fears of political correctness for something that's inappropriate whatever your political/religious/personal leanings.
-
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
