libreplanet-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 132, Issue 4


From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
Subject: Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 132, Issue 4
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2021 18:17:08 +0100

   On Sunday, April 4, 2021, Danny Spitzberg <[1]stationaery@gmail.com>
   wrote:

   Luke, you say “the” purpose of a code of conduct is to destroy
   communities.

   i apologise: to clarify: the intent may be to create a safe and
   welcoming environment.

   (i did not say having NO code is recommended, again, sorry if i gave
   that impression)

   the *effect* on the other hand of toxic CoCs is to blast and smash
   people psychologically, at the very first moment that they enter the
   environment, with such a god-awful list that the only thing it achieves
   is to create an undercurrent of fear and unease.

   everyone treads on eggshells, interacting with others in constant fear
   that their actions and words are going to be misunderstood.

   you may have heard the story that when the EU mandated that anyone on
   scaffolding had to be harnessed in to rails: the result was that there
   were *more accidents and deaths*.

   it is simply a fact of psychology that if you focus on fear and
   discrimination, you get.... fear and discrimination.

   *whatever* you focus your attention on, that is what you get.

   I say, there are many purposes- and one of them is to prevent
   harassment and harm.

   great.  then that's *all* that needs to be said!

   in fact, even the word "harassment" may be left out because it is
   redundant.  if someone is "harassed", in 100% of cases it may
   categorically be deduced that they have been "harmed", yes?  therefore
   why state it twice??

   there is however one thing missing from that innocuously simple
   declaration: a corresponding *positive* statement.

   a positive statement encourages positive behaviour.

   paradoxically: a negative statement *actually encourages negative
   behaviour* because that's what's on everyone's minds.

   don't think of a pink elephant.

   i would like to see a code that very simply invites people to:

   a) do good, and

   b) never do harm.

   this basically assumes AND TRUSTS, fundamentally, that people know the
   difference between what is right and what is wrong.

   the interesting thing is that by them engaging with a community that
   has such a simple compact it gives you, the other participants, the
   right - the RIGHT - as well as the RESPONSIBILITY - to explain it to
   people for whom, it turns out, do not actually know.

   (that right and resonsibility extends to ALL participants.
   categorically including those subjected *to* "harm".  and all those
   *witnessing* such "harm" occurring)

   all of that WITHOUT poisoning the entire community with some
   proscriptive behaviours that literally terrorise and poison all
   participants including those who dreamed up the toxic list.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:stationaery@gmail.com
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]