Comment by skizzles@lemmy.ml on SerenityOS and LadyBirds: Because These Things Shouldn't Hide in Closed Git Conversations

Found this blog post and found it had more insight into the issues around the dev and the toxicity in FOSS

I understand that, but the whole point behind it was them making an assumption about something and proposing a change because they didn’t like their term that the dev used. Yet there was LITERALLY nothing wrong with the term.

The guy definitely made an ass of himself with his responses.

Like I said, both of them are idiots over this. It was pointless to make an issue out of it to begin with, and then then the dev making it even worse didn’t help.

I understand that

I’m not convinced

I understand

No, no clearly don’t.

You seem very, very sure of there being “LITERALLY” no problem with the gendered pronoun being used for an unknown user.

Instead of hand-waving it away as the author being male and just prefering his own pronouns in his writing, we could maybe consider where it is being written and why it might feel particularly non-inclusive? ie: a field that has historically been very intentionally uninviting to women?

Also, it’s not like this was someone petitioning for a boycott over one assumed pronoun, they just quietly fixed the grammar and submitted the change. Absolutely nothing idiotic about it.

There literally wasn’t a problem.

Until the person that asked for the correction literally assumed that said dev was assuming. Since thats what they said in their comment.

So I can understand being a little pissy at someone pointing to you and accusing you of assuming something. It’s stupid.

I may have been a little irritated too if someone accused me of assuming something. I wouldn’t have reacted the same, but I would have been clear that I in no way assume anything related to gender identity.

If the person wouldn’t have put that assumption into their comment, the change may have been more likely to happen.

Instead they assumed something and got push back which turned into the scene we see now.

Ass u me… I mean it’s pretty clear.

Ah OK, I think we’re getting to the heart of why you are saying that this wasn’t an issue.

When you say that the author wasn’t assuming anything, what exactly do you mean? If, for example, I write in a guide that if a user of my software does ‘a’ then he can expect result ‘b’, do you disagree that I am assuming my users go by he/him pronouns?

I might not have done it with intention, but there is an assumption being made there. Words mean things.

Exactly this.

Just because you wrote your documentation a certain way, doesn’t automatically mean that you feel a certain way about any particular group, or that your users are primarily a certain gender. It may just be writing what pronoun you are most familiar with.

In this particular case, we can see that the author didn’t exactly make the best case for himself.

However, there was never a problem to begin with until the person that requested the change also accused the the author of assuming that the user/dev of the OS is male.

If that little bit of accusation would have been left out, and they just put a note like “grammatical correction” it may have just been accepted and moved on. Instead they asked for a change while accusing the author of feeling a certain way.

So, not ‘exactly this’. I wrote that in my example an assumption had been made, whether I intended it or not.

Same as in the documentation this post is about, therefore the problem existed before it was pointed out.

The grammatical error to be fixed was the assumption in the language used. Both of these things are true. Pointing it out very simply, as part of providing the reason for the change, is completely normal

As an outside observer, who is a male which is important for this sentence, if something said “if a user of my software does ‘a’ then she can expect result ‘b’,” I wouldn’t assume I couldn’t use the software, I wouldn’t be mad about the gendered pronoun, I wouldn’t assume anything about the author, I’d say “cool so if I do A I can expect result B.” I don’t think I’d even give it a second glance, at best/worst I’d think “oh neat I wonder if the devs are women” and move on with installing the thing.

That’s great! Same here, to be honest. But I also realise why it doesn’t affect me, because as a man I’ve never felt unwelcome in these spaces purely on account of my gender.

Kind of like how as a white guy, I wouldn’t really feel much other than a bit of surprise if someone called me a cracker. I haven’t felt oppression and prejudice connected to that word, or any other that is to do with my whiteness. But I do NOT then turn around and say “well why are people upset about being called n-words? They should just move on with their day like I can!”

No honestly if we change it to be a woman dominated field where I’d feel unwelcome instead of a male dominated field, like say teaching, I still wouldn’t be upset at the assumption because frankly it doesn’t hinder my ability to understand the material, I can read it as a typo and move on.

Unless I guess the person was aware of who I am and intentionally misgendering me to be a dick, then yeah, but if we’ve never met and the thing I’m reading is general, then it basically is just a typo the author didn’t realize they made.

the whole point behind it was them making an assumption about something

What makes you think the change suggesters assumed ill intent?

The submitted PRs seem to reason improvement, not accuse the original author. I see them suggesting a change, neutrally. With (minimal) objective reasoning.

/edit: I see the later ones did. But the first one didn’t. And the second one arguably didn’t.

If it’s free and open source and it’s also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.

This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

SerenityOS and LadyBirds: Because These Things Shouldn't Hide in Closed Git Conversations - ░ Nova Online(cmdr-nova.online)

Free and Open Source Software

!foss@beehaw.org

Community stats

Community moderators