Tag: SJW

Project Big Fork

Tonight at 7 PM EST is the Open Brainstorm where we will be seriously discussing the project I am leading. If you’ve read SJWAL, you know what it is. You can register here; attendance is limited to 500 and 100 VFM are already registered, so if you are seriously interested in supporting a major anti-SJW offensive and are willing to put your money where your mouth is, you should register for the event sooner rather than later.

No transcripts or recordings will be released. A summary will be provided to the VFM who can’t be there.

Mailvox: SJWs in tech media

An anonymous coward provides an update:

I noticed today that someone linked to you on the LWN.net news site, and was banned.  LWN is one of the most respected Linux news websites.  However, the owner is a thoroughly SJW-amenable authority.  There is no benefit to posting there.  The mere use of the phrase SJW there can get you blocked.  Corbet (the owner) says, in all the long history of the site, this is the first time he’s drawn a line in the sand.  He is now deleting comments that discuss or refer to the SJW issue.

The VFM look like they’re doing good work on slashdot, the second most popular Linux site.  Huzzah!

Actually, this is good news as well as an indication of another opportunity. First, since LWN is already converged, that means it is vulnerable to replacement. Something to consider as the cultural war in tech gets hotter.

Second, the fact that the SJW who runs LWN is so concerned about any mention of SJW entryism and convergence that he refuses to permit its discussion, despite it being one of the most important issues in technology at the moment, means that he knows his SJW allies cannot succeed if their efforts are exposed.

The silencing of the tech lambs

An anonymous developer explains why he has to remain anonymous:

Religious wars in software used to be about a fat bearded man named He-macs wrestling a pencil-neck named Vimmy over what text editor to use, but now FOSS devs are concerned about making sure marginalized human beings feel “welcome,” as if someone was trying to physically block newcomers. That opens the door to social justice and other buzzwords that prigs use to feel better about themselves, and utopian visions documented in “Codes of Conduct,” or CoC.

The sentiment behind a CoC is that there is no excuse for being an ass, which sounds great until you realize that only a select few people get to decide who’s an ass. So when open source leaders want to stop you from doing free work they can pretend that its your fault for violating their code instead of admitting they never really wanted to include just anybody. They’ve managed to make exclusivity look inclusive, and it makes me crazy that so few people see that….

They exempt themselves from their own standards and announce their
willingness to proxy dox anyone if persuaded to do so on subjective
grounds. There is no privacy for you: If you look privileged and someone
makes up a story about you, you might get a concerned email from HR
about something making the rounds on Twitter and causing a PR nightmare
for your employer. Whether or not you actually did anything wrong won’t
matter.

Hacker Eric S. Raymond noticed the manipulation at work and indicated that women at tech conferences were targeting male open source leaders with false allegations. Accusations have power, and the 2013 PyCon incident with Adria Richards proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

We need to acknowledge the problem. If you are not considered worthy
of protection by ideological CoCs, then there are people out there that
want you to at the very least lose your job. If they see you
demonstrating even the most innocuous affection or humor, they will
likely assume malice and retaliate, especially if you are the wrong
color or sex. These are the same people who humiliated a scientist for
landing on a comet because of a shirt he wore.

If you think it’s bad now, just wait. The next step is going to be taking open source projects and closing them so that they cannot be forked. After all, what is the point of going to all this trouble to take over OSS if the productive people can simply render all their efforts irrelevant by a fork?

They don’t want a seat at the table, they want control. And what good is control if you can’t control everything?

As for those who say it’s not possible because the rules of open source don’t permit it, remember, they don’t only exempt themselves from their own standards, they exempt themselves from anything that limits their ability to pursue their objectives.

I was hoping to do the Open Brainstorm tonight, but we’ll do it tomorrow at 7 PM EST instead. I’ll send out the invites to the VFM tonight, and post the link publicly tomorrow afternoon.

Facebook is not your friend

Facebook has transformed itself into Big Brother. If you’re on it, it’s time to get off the platform:

Facebook began a Europe-wide campaign on Monday to thwart extremist posts on social media, after German politicians in particular raised concerns about a rise in xenophobic comments linked to an influx of refugees.

The U.S.-based group launched its “Initiative for Civil Courage Online” in Berlin, pledging over 1 million euros (1 million pounds) to support non-governmental organisations in their efforts to counter racist and xenophobic posts.

Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg said hate speech “has no place in our society”, including in the Internet.

Facebook’s ground rules forbid bullying, harassment and threatening language, but critics say it does not enforce them properly. On Friday, the firm said it had hired a unit of the publisher Bertelsmann to monitor and delete racist posts on its platform in Germany.

One of the first things Facebook has apparently done, as part of this campaign “to counter racist and xenophobic posts”, is to expel over 1,000 members of the Facebook group “#GamerGate & #NotYourShield”. The 2,300-member Facebook group #GG  was also shut down yesterday.

Some have said that it was a group mod who was responsible; I’m not on Facebook and I wasn’t a member of those groups, so I don’t know. All I know is from an email sent by a member of both groups who was expelled from the first one.

Regardless, it is important to understand that Facebook is not your friend. Facebook is your enemy and it is the enemy of Western civilization. So stop supporting it. Stop using it.

UPDATE: Facebook has also repeatedly removed the video of a 15-year-old German girl who expressed her fears of those who have invaded her country on the grounds of xenophobia:

Hello, you can read the newspapers but this video is about the real situation in Germany. I would like to tell everyone about this on Youtube and Facebook. I am almost 16. I would like everyone to know what is going on, what I am authentically feeling at this moment.

And I am so scared everywhere. For example, if my family and I go out together, or if I see a movie with my friends. Usually I stay at home, but sometimes I stay out until 6 pm in winter, and it is so scary. It is just very hard to live day-to-day life as a woman.

I just want to say that I am not a racist. But one day, a terrible thing happened at the supermarket. I ran all the way home. I was so frightened for my life. There’s no other way to describe it.

My aunt and her friend have said you have to grow up. Why should we, children, have to grow up in such fear? It’s not just me, my friends too. You can see on Facebook, a 17 year old attacked, a 15 year old attacked, two 12-year olds attacked, so many. It is really so sad that this is happening … because of YOU PEOPLE. 🙁

Mailvox: a convention, converged

The lesson, as always, is this: don’t ever take McRapey’s advice:

Arisia is a mid-sized sf and fantasy convention in Boston which has been taken over by SJW’s despite some of us attempting to resist them. This year’s GOH was John Scalzi who triggered several changes to the code of conduct.

However, the con chair wasn’t satisfied was that. She insisted that every attendee sign a printed copy of the COC, even though it required 5 point type to fit on a single page. The con cobbled together new registration software and procedures to fulfill this requirement, but there were many problems with it. The registration line reached nearly 3 hours though its peak last year had been about 20 minutes.

Furthermore, faced with this fiasco, the con chair still was unwilling to back off the requirement to expedite registration.

Prediction: attendance at the conventions that have adopted Codes of Conduct that affect the experience in any way will gradually fall off. I know that in the Django project, the amount of emails and posts have already fallen off considerably, because everyone is, quite rightly, afraid that saying anything will make them a target of SJW attack.

This is why you don’t permit their entryists in the first place, and why you certainly don’t give into their demands. Convergence always eventually kills the converged organization unless it can latch onto a host that will financially sustain it.

No Code of Conduct

Paul M Jones provides another good way to address SJW entryst attacks:

What is NCoC

No Code Of Conduct is a groundbreaking new idea. Designed to help you find communities and projects that will not get stuck endlessly debating how members should behave in their communities, only to be found to never be fully resolved to anyone’s liking. What if… we all agreed?

    We are all adults. Capable of having adult discussions.

    We accept everyone’s contributions, we don’t care if you’re liberal or conservative, black or white, straight or gay, or anything in between! In fact, we won’t bring it up, or ask. We simply do not care.

    Nothing else matters!

Q: Great! How do I add this to my project?

Simply copy CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md into the root directory of your project. You may modify it to your needs.

Q: How do I promote No Code of Conduct?

Feel free to talk about, discuss, and promote No Code of Conduct anywhere you wish, and use the hashtag #NCoC on Twitter.

Q: What if, this makes me feel discriminated against?

If you feel this way simply because we do not have a code of conduct, it is hard for anyone to relate to you. This is not intended to discriminate against anyone. Simply because we don’t babysit people on our site to make sure they treat you with respect, does not mean we hope you feel unwelcome, or that you are treated without respect. That is just not something we have time for.

I still favor the One-Finger Code of Conduct myself, but there is certainly a place for the No Code of Conduct as well as the Code of Merit.

SJWs in tech

“Women in Tech” is not only code for “SJWs in Tech”, but it is a massive waste of resources and it is extremely harmful to the women who are coerced and encouraged to waste their lives doing something for which they have neither the interest nor the commitment:

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
No individual with a useful skill set capable of delivering needs to be babied or coerced into working.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
You do women a terrible disservice by trying to convince those who are not seriously interested in the field to enter it.

Jennifer Medina ‏@JenniferJMedina
You do everyone a terrible disservice by discouraging every human being from being introduced to more of what life has to offer.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
You’re wrong. I save those people years of their lives and thousands of dollars by showing them what it ACTUALLY involves.

Jennifer Medina ‏@JenniferJMedina
I don’t give a flying fuck about your anecdotal evidence. Your personal views and life are not on the table of discussion here.

Wrongfan ‏@Badthincks
I am a STEM woman (mathematics) and he is right.  In fact I spent years trying to push girls into STEM.

Wrongfan ‏@Badthincks
It’s a waste of time to try and push ANYONE into something they have no genuine inclination for.

Considering how there are already far too many PhDs for the number of positions available, and that there are already 1,000 people applying for 12 game development positions, it should be obvious that encouraging uninterested women to go into a field where they are almost guaranteed to go unemployed is reprehensible.

Stats provided by Creative Skillset show that in 2014, 60 universities and colleges offered 215 undergraduate and 40 master video game courses. The most recent stats available, courtesy of the Higher Education Statistics Agency for the 2012/2013 academic year, show that 3,125 students were taking games as a subject of study.

Compare this with the 620 studios in the UK, according to TIGA, and you can see the difficulties studios face when lending experience in such a highly competitive field. Lenton says a local studio in  Leamington Spa, which houses around up to 300 staff, recently had over 1,000 applications for a dozen places.

What are the chances that a girl who required hand-holding and cheerleading just to get her to pay any attention to the industry in the first place is going to be talented and driven enough to beat out the 98.8 percent of highly competitive young men and women who want nothing more than to make games?

That’s not career advice. That’s a fantasy novel.

SF-SJWs double down

Allum Bokhari of Breitbart addresses the latest attempts by SJWs in science fiction to silence all dissent:

There is no doubt that some sci-fi authors hold views that are alien to much of mainstream, liberal opinion. However, the SJWs who are trying to drive them out continue to fail to grasp that no political opinion is justification for exclusion from awards participation, bookstores, or the sci-fi community at large. The point of sci-fi is good sci-fi, and the point of awards is to recognise good sci-fi, not politically conformist opinions.

SJWs continue to demonstrate their inability – or unwillingness – to separate good art from questionable artists. In a manner eerily similar to the anti-historical campaigns to scrub images of unfashionable – yet historically significant – individuals like Woodrow Wilson and Cecil Rhodes from university campuses and public spaces. At the behest of SJWs,  the face of H.P Lovecraft, one of the genre’s pioneers, was recently removed from the iconic trophies of the World Fantasy Awards.

There’s something ISIS-like to it: the purging of historical icons and works of art because they represent something that falls outside a rigid, intolerant ideology.

Political intolerance in sci-fi appears to be growing, not diminishing. The Sad Puppies of 2016 will have their work cut out for them.

The mere fact that they are having to do openly what they managed to do behind closed doors for 30 years is a victory. And from Castalia House to Brave, we’re seeing one example after another of those who love freedom fighting back.

We’re going to win, in the end, because they are nothing but parasites and cargo cultists. They can’t create, they can’t build, all they can do is latch onto something someone else has created and converge it. Now, as the recent actions by the Linux Foundation have demonstrated, people are realizing that if they do not keep out the entryists, if they do not expel the SJWs, their organizations will not survive.

No SJWs allowed

One senses the hand of Linus Torvalds behind this unexpected action by the Linux Foundation:

Linux Foundation quietly drops community representation

The Linux Foundation is an industry organisation dedicated to “promoting, protecting and standardising Linux and open source software”[1]. The majority of its board is chosen by the member companies – 10 by platinum members (platinum membership costs $500,000 a year), 3 by gold members (gold membership costs $100,000 a year) and 1 by silver members (silver membership costs between $5,000 and $20,000 a year, depending on company size). Up until recently individual members ($99 a year) could also elect two board members, allowing for community perspectives to be represented at the board level.

As of last Friday, this is no longer true. The by-laws were amended to drop the clause that permitted individual members to elect any directors. Section 3.3(a) now says that no affiliate members may be involved in the election of directors, and section 5.3(d) still permits at-large directors but does not require them[2]. The old version of the bylaws are here – the only non-whitespace differences are in sections 3.3(a) and 5.3(d).

These changes all happened shortly after Karen Sandler announced that she planned to stand for the Linux Foundation board during a presentation last September. A short time later, the “Individual membership” program was quietly renamed to the “Individual supporter” program and the promised benefit of being allowed to stand for and participate in board elections was dropped (compare the old page to the new one). Karen is the executive director of the Software Freedom Conservancy, an organisation involved in the vitally important work of GPL enforcement. The Linux Foundation has historically been less than enthusiastic about GPL enforcement, and the SFC is funding a lawsuit against one of the Foundation’s members for violating the terms of the GPL. The timing may be coincidental, but it certainly looks like the Linux Foundation was willing to throw out any semblance of community representation just to ensure that there was no risk of someone in favour of GPL enforcement ending up on their board.

The Foundation’s action doesn’t have anything to do with Karen Sandler being the executive director of the Software Freedom Conservancy, but rather, her having been the executive director of the Gnome Foundation, which she bankrupted in three years by devoting nearly 50 percent of the foundation’s budget to a new Women’s Outreach Program.

This demonstrates the seriousness of the threat that the most influential  people in tech know that the SJWs pose to it. It is well worth destroying the community aspect of a project to keep them out, if necessary, because if they are allowed in, they will spend all their time and effort in attempting to take it over; even if they are prevented from doing so, far too many resources will be wasted in stopping them, resources that could have been spent on achieving the goals of the project.

Keep them out. As Linus knows, even it requires changing the rules, you have to keep them out.

A second SJW attack on PHP

Another SJW, this time one Derick Rethan, takes another crack at imposing a Code of Conduct on PHP:

Hi, I’ve decided to re-propose the CoC RFC. There are many reasons for it, but there are a few points I want to make. I strongly believe that a Code of Conduct is required. The amount of toxic behaviour on this list is in my opinion unacceptable. It drives people away, it certainly did. It is also one of the reasons I am not nearly as active as I used to be.

It also makes me reluctant to welcome and mentor new people wanting to contribute. I have said “no” to two people in the last few days, mostly because I am not sure whether I want them exposed to some of the things being said on the list.

But I think this list, and hence this project, and language, can be improved. A Code of Conduct alone is not enough. The focus for this list, and wider community, should be on collaborating to make PHP even better and faster than it already is. Collaboration works better in a happy environment, where people work together instead of against each other.

The new 0.5 version of the RFC that is up at  https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct focusses more on working  together and mediation than on acting with an iron fist on when things
go awry, although these parts of the RFC are still included. In my opinion, an CoC that is not enforced is nothing but some text on a piece  of paper—or in our case, a few bits on a disk. I have added a section,  Constructive Contributor Guidelines, in addition to the CoC. This section definitely needs improving.

I would everybody invite you to help out improving this RFC, but please take into account  https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct#constructive_collaboration_guidelines

I want this to work, and work together, to get this approved.

cheers,

If the project leader at PHP has any sense at all, he will expel this SJW from the project immediately. Notice how he spews squid ink the moment his idiocy is confronted:

There is no mechanism or ability for one to confront ones accuser

That is a tricky one. In my opinion, in the case of abuse as pointed out in the draft CoC, I think this is fair, and necessary that we all for reports of abuse in private, and with secrecy. Without it, an accusor is likely immediately going to be lambasted by the perpetrator.

Here we have the core of (yet another) problem: presumption of guilt. The “accused” is casually referred to as the “perpetrator.”  This is *exactly* why the accused needs to be able to confront the accuser.

The common reply here is to say “oops, sorry, I meant to say ‘the accused'”.  I don’t think that’s true; it’s a wink-and-a-nod, a recognition that one has revealed their true thoughts: all accusations are to be believed. Except, of course, the ones that are not to be believed, and those will (strangely enough) line up with the political beliefs of the enforcers. Because it is a political document, the Contributor Covenant is *intended* to work that way.

That is only one of the many reasons the Contributor Covenant, and all documents like it, should be removed in toto from any Code of Conduct discussion.

There is nothing “tricky” about it. SJWs want to be able to act arbitrarily, and in secret, without any oversight or possibility of public protest. Again, PHP should ban this SJW from the project immediately; he is actively seeking to destroy it and he is using deception to do so.

Furthermore, the Code of Merit appears to be an effective way to go, because the SJWs are definitely against it:

I had a look at this, and I think it is not suitable. It is almost the exact opposite of promoting collaborative behaviour, and instead only focusses on the “if you done nothing before, you have no voice”. There is also no chance the PHP project will have have a benevolent dictator (or group of people). And it only focusses on the technical aspects of a community, but even covering a set of guidelines to improve collaboration.

Remember, to the SJW, “not suitable” means “it won’t help us take control and play thought police.” But clearly it can be approved. “Almost the exact opposite” is not good enough. If they’re not shrieking and crying and protesting, it’s clearly not enough.

Show them you mean business and will not put up with the disruption. Kick them out as soon as they show themselves.