• 0 Posts
  • 131 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • A few weeks? How do you stay employed? How do you even feed yourself at that pace? Blocked on making a sandwich, I’ve got the wrong type of bread.

    It’s three lines in an editor config file to standardize the indents across any editor: https://editorconfig.org/

    In vscode, adding two extensions is all I need:, yamllint (if you don’t use linters, I don’t know how you do your job in any language) and rainbow indents. Atom had similar ones. I’m sure all IDEs are capable of these things. If you work at a place that forces you to use a specific editor and limits the way you can use it, that’s not YAML’s fault.

    At a certain point, it’s your deficiencies that make a language difficult, not the language’s. Don’t blame your hammer when you haven’t heated the iron.


  • So it’s easy to enforce locally but you don’t have to. And it’s easy to see indentation on modern IDEs and you can even make your indents rainbows and collapse structures to make it easier to see what’s going on, but I guess since some people want to write it in vi without ALE or a barebones text editor, it’s bad? Like there are legit reasons it’s bad, and other people have mentioned them throughout the thread, but this seems like a pretty easy thing to deal with. I work with ansible a bunch and YAML rarely is where my problem is.




  • Right, it’s not a company, and it relies on the unpaid labor of volunteers, who Peters was driving away. That’s mentioned in the thread. Though they are not a company with employees, they are still a community that needs to attract talent. You seem to be giving a lot more leeway to interpretations of Peters’ words than my comparison. Odd.

    So he’s dismissing the training; in doing so he’s also dismissing that it’s worthwhile to try and have an environment free from sexual harassment. That’s not somebody I’d want as a representative of an inclusive community. The steering committee seems to agree.

    From the Coc:

    • Showing empathy towards other community members. We’re attentive in our communications, whether in person or online, and we’re tactful when approaching differing views.
    • Being considerate. Members of the community are considerate of their peers – other Python users.
    • Being respectful. We’re respectful of others, their positions, their skills, their commitments, and their efforts.
    • Gracefully accepting constructive criticism. When we disagree, we are courteous in raising our issues.
    • Using welcoming and inclusive language. We’re accepting of all who wish to take part in our activities, fostering an environment where anyone can participate and everyone can make a difference.






  • In the same comment from Smith:

    I want to assure everyone that the points we made in the original post were so pointed exactly because of the complaints we received from community members.

    The “points” being three of the items that appeared on the suspension. This is specifically about Tim Peters.

    So to sum up: they received complaints specifically about Peters. Then said people (plural) complain and that’s how they hear about it. If that’s not clear, it’s not the author’s fault.



  • You can read one of the responses about this that’s linked in the article: https://discuss.python.org/t/inclusive-communications-expectations-in-python-spaces/57950/11

    Other members and users repeatedly complained about Peters’ conduct which resulted in the list. From that particular link:

    This is exactly how the rest of us hear about the many people who don’t want to be here because of the behaviors they routinely witness and experience.

    Members and would be members are quite literally afraid to bring it up publicly because they get jumped on by people telling them they are wrong. They simply do not want to interact in our spaces at all which means they remain invisible and even when some are brave enough to speak up, as has happened multiple times in these threads, they appear to often be ignored. It is shameful.

    The number of people I’ve worked with who would’ve made great open source contributors, here or elsewhere, who’ve effectively turned tail and said “hell no!” to the suggestion because of how they see people get treated by those already in this pool is more than I can count. :frowning:




  • I’m not sure what your point is. You said to the parent comment in this thread that it wasn’t a right winger. I provided a quote from the article that supported that he was. Now you’re bringing up one thing that he pushed back against? I don’t think that balances out. He had a pattern of going against the code of conduct multiple times with about a third of his comments being called into question. Then you put words in my mouth saying I’m saying ageism is ok because I use the article to show his behavior is crappy. What’s your point? Ageism is bad? I agree. Peters is redeemed by that one push back? I disagree.


  • Did you? Here’s what was mentioned in the suspension and it all sounds right wing to me:

    “Defending ‘reverse racism’ and ‘reverse sexism’, concepts not backed by empirical evidence, which could be seen as deliberate intimidation or creating an exclusionary environment.” “Using potentially offensive language or slurs, in one case even calling an SNL [Saturday Night Live] skit from the 1970s using the same slur ‘genuinely funny’, which shows a lack of empathy towards other community members.” (More context on that here.) “Making light of sensitive topics like workplace sexual harassment, which could be interpreted as harassment or creating an unwelcoming environment.” “Casually mentioning scenarios involving sexual abuse, which may be inappropriate or triggering for some audiences.” “Discussing bans or removals of community members, which may be seen as publishing private information without permission.” "Dismissing unacceptable behavior of others as a ‘neurodivergent’ trait, which is problematic because it creates a stereotype that neurodivergent people are hard to interact with and need special treatment. “Excessive discussion of controversial topics or past conflicts, which could be seen as sustained disruption of community discussions.” “Use of potentially offensive terms, even when self-censored or alluded to indirectly.” “Making assumptions or speculations about other community members’ motivations and/or mental health.”