This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Yeah there are perpetually offended on the other side of the political spectrum that are equally nihilistic. Those nihilist got upset with the Lizzo twerking with a crystal flute they didn't know existed until the video showed up. I only imply leftist in the subsequent paragraphs and not in the first one. Thus the other reply saying that I'm waging a culture war. But I don't believe that it is a single group that is offended because of their lack of values but many groups and of many political persuasions.
You mean that I need to dig up the literary analysis I read that inspired me to read Notes of the Underground? It made the connection of nihilism with offence of something imagined slight almost treated as a game by the perpetrator. I read it so long ago but that quote has stuck with me. Values, created, lack of, and/or passed on from a higher power are a central theme to his works in general.
Sorry, no, I wanted to see a more thorough analysis on why you think those who "engage in virtual struggle sessions in the GitHub issue tracker and defend race-swapping" are nihilistic. It's a little easier to argue that the broader dynamics of social media are hollow.
Dostoevsky did his diligence, to be sure, and I have no qualms with your reading of him.
So the formal proof managment system Coq is going to change its name any day now to use a less sexist name. Oh they have been in a naming committee for over a year now! https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names
I've witnessed so many of these where a complaint is lodged in the issue tracker over something without more reason that something in the "project" is problematic and not inclusive in some way. It is just simple wording or including a CoC(note the acronym for Code of Conduct) . It is not consistent or helping the project in a meaningful way to be more inclusive.
I witnessed the eton project get piled on for its original name of “coon” without fully explaining to the project author what the problem is, just assuming that the author is American.
How about this a German guy complaining to the Italian about the usage of master/slave internally in the Italian guys project, which is quite popular.
All of these examples take no concern in that there are consequences to the things that they are wanting to change. Because changing stuff other than adding a CoC could possibly break stuff or make a casual user not finding it again.
As for race-swapping a character is in some contexts possibility to break immersion. In a similar way not valuing the consumer of the thing that they want change only thinking of their own sensibilities.
As a French user of proof assistants I'm offended Americans would try to destroy yet more of our cultural achievements over their hangups.
Truly nothing is safe.
More options
Context Copy link
That sounds wrong and likely delusional and stupid, but not nihilistic, at least not without extra steps. According to SocJus ideology, naming something like Coq would cause some people, especially women and people of color, to feel uncomfortable and thus less encouraged to join projects that might use it. Under this framework, changing the name is a way to make the project meaningfully more inclusive.
Also:
I have to wonder how long it will be before Codes of Conduct will have to be renamed for forming an acronym that is similarly harmful to inclusivity according to SocJus ideology.
Well the point why I think it is nihilistic is the fact the name change hasn’t happened in year since the wiki page was authored. Not even the complainer believes the name is important enough to follow up on it.
I see, it seems that I misunderstood you, and your point seems a good one. Could it be that they're principled but lazy? Which, to be fair, is really just another way of saying nihilistic.
Being principled would imply consistency and you yourself noted that the inconsistency with regards of CoC vs Coq. It is the same thing as pro-life activists murdering people. Actions speak louder than words. Just because they say that they are principled on 'Inclusion' with regards of GitHub projects, then they start to argue for exclusion of viewpoints that aren't distinctly North American. And looking at the behavior, actual inclusion doesn't matter to them, the results of the projects doesn't matter to them, hard work doesn't matter to them, contributing useful stuff doesn't matter to them. What does matter to these people? Nihilism pure and simple they don't value anything except their own viewpoint.
edit: To point out to other people just because that the github complainers happen to be "leftist" doesn't mean that similar phenomena doesn't exist on the right. I've seen plenty of people from the right being equally indifferent to the outcomes of their activism thus the example of "pro-life" murderers.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link