On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:46 PM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> On 1/13/16 1:18 PM, Tom Worster wrote: > > On 1/12/16 5:58 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > > >> But we can not change the conduct of "whole of internals as a group". > > > > Yes we can! > > > > Let's say *we* would improve our conduct. I mean *we* as literally you > > and me: two individuals. As a result the conduct of "whole of > > internals as a group" would improve a bit. If improving our own > > individual conduct was deliberate then I think we could say that *we* > > changed the conduct of "whole of internals as a group" a bit. > > > > Now let's say *several individuals* would improve their conduct. The > > change in the conduct of "whole of internals as a group" is larger. > > And *they* effected the change. > > > > Since programmers like us are skilled with variables and inference, we > > can try this over some more descriptors of sets of individuals such as > > 'several more individuals', 'many people', 'half the regulars', and so > > forth. > > > > So I am sure we *can* change the conduct of "whole of internals as a > > group". > > > > More speculative but interesting are descriptors like 'a few key > > Internals participants', 'some of the thought leaders on Internals', > > 'the most prolific contributors of poor conduct in Internals', and so > > on, whatever these terms may mean, use your imagination, invent more. > > > > It's really fascinating to ponder this and it gives me hope. > > > > Increasing the speculation a bit more, people typically try to fit in > > to their social context (which, incidentally, is part of Internals' > > culture problem). How many of the most influential voices here need to > > change before we see others following the lead and yet others > > introducing themselves? > > > > Even further, what if some of these took it upon themselves to try to > > steer others to better conduct from time to time? > > There's an important point we've been glossing over here that I think is > important to make explicit, as it is part of the reticence people have > about CoCs, "culture change", etc. That all presupposes that there are > problems, which means that fixing them implies some people's behavior > will need to change. People don't like needing to change their behavior > (regardless of whether that behavior is subjectively "good" or "bad"). > > If we want to improve the culture on Internals (whether via a CoC or > not), that means a not-small percentage of people in this community will > need to change their behavior. That is by definition what is being > discussed. That process will be much smoother if people feel > incentivized to do so themselves rather than forced to externally, for > the simple reason that we're all humans (aside from the one or two > Andorians who are lurking). But yes, either approach (formal or > informal) means culture change, and therefore behavior change by a lot > of people. > > I think you're actually missing the point as to why most of the people were against a CoC (or at least the proposed CoC). It wasn't a matter of what the status quo was, but that the CoC, at best, wouldn't solve the issues it was meant to solve (whether such issues existed is irrelevant) and, at worst, would lead a more negative atmosphere rife with unintended consequences. Yes, there were a few people asking "do we even need this," but in terms of those against the proposal, they were the minority from what I could tell. tl;dr; - Even if you could never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than PHP internals, I (and my others) would still not support the proposed CoC. > Let's not forget that, but let's also acknowledge that and accept that > we will need to change. > > > > >>> Here’s how: *STOP BEING TOXIC*. How? I dunno. I’m open to ideas. I’m > >> > >> So, let's proceed to ideas? > > > > Culture is not easy to change but it can be done. Every individual > > here has a moral choice (in the philosopher's sense) how they > > contribute to that culture. If people want to reduce overall toxicity > > and are willing to make some effort, I can see a path forwards based > > on the ideas above. > > > > What does it take for any given individual to change their habits of > > communication in Internals? Lots of things, I suppose. And it's > > probably not easy. But I think only pathological cases are incapable. > > > > One obvious question is: Who goes first? In other words, how do I > > benefit if I become civil and others don't. > > > > Another: Is there any need for or value in trying to organize this a > > bit? I think so. > > > > I imagine there are good sources of information on effective > > communications in various contexts. So perhaps Internals could adopt > > something as their style guide, so to speak, that's voluntary but > > recommended. It would be useful in a number of ways, one being > > something specific to point at when asking a correspondent to modify > > her or his style. While it addresses a different problem, Raymond's > > "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way," is quite well know. It at least > > supports the notion that The Internals Style Guide I imagine could > > possibly exist. > > Many lists I'm on, particularly those with high churn, send out an email > every month automatically with list rules et al. 98% of people won't > bother reading them 98% of the time, but for the first time you see it > it's an indication of "oh, yeah, they've code some expectations in > place, maybe I'll read them" and for subsequent times it's a reminder of > "oh yeah, that thing, it exists." Similar idea to the company (I forget > which) that has the company principles printed out in everyone's cube to > read over every morning. > > That email would include either the text of or links to a "list rules" > doc (which is not necessarily easy to find as is), a link to a CoC > should one pass, etc. Keep it reasonably short, but having it > in-your-face for even a few seconds once a month can be helpful over time. > > > Finally, I remarked yesterday that the current Internals culture > > serves a political purpose: to support the existing power hierarchy. > > That's rather pessimistic but there remains hope if one believes power > > can be exerted effectively through good conduct. > > ^^ This. > > > Tom > > > > > > -- > --Larry Garfield > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- -- Chase chasepee...@gmail.com
