Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
The Internet Your Rights Online

FreeBSD's New Code of Conduct ( 859

FreeBSD has a new code of conduct, which is making several people angry. From the blog post: This code of conduct applies to all spaces used by the FreeBSD Project, including our mailing lists, IRC channels, and social media, both online and off. Anyone who is found to violate this code of conduct may be sanctioned or expelled from FreeBSD Project controlled spaces at the discretion of the FreeBSD Code of Conduct Committee. Participants are responsible for knowing and abiding by these rules. Harassment includes but is not limited to: Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion. Unwelcome comments regarding a person's lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment. Deliberate misgendering. Deliberate use of "dead" or rejected names. Gratuitous or off-topic sexual images or behaviour in spaces where they're not appropriate.

Physical contact and simulated physical contact (e.g., textual descriptions like "hug" or "backrub") without consent or after a request to stop. Threats of violence. Incitement of violence towards any individual, including encouraging a person to commit suicide or to engage in self-harm. Deliberate intimidation. Stalking or following. Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes. Sustained disruption of discussion. Unwelcome sexual attention. Pattern of inappropriate social contact, such as requesting/assuming inappropriate levels of intimacy with others. Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease. Deliberate "outing" of any private aspect of a person's identity without their consent except as necessary to protect vulnerable people from intentional abuse. Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent. Publication of non-harassing private communication with consent but in a way that intentionally misrepresents the communication (e.g., removes context that changes the meaning). Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FreeBSD's New Code of Conduct

Comments Filter:
  • by sgage ( 109086 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:07AM (#56141782)

    ... but if I did, I would quit. This is over the top. It feels more like a blanket list of vague infractions to have on hand so that they can rid of anyone they feel like.

    • by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:07AM (#56141790)
      This. It actually sounds like something I'd read on the Onion.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        Remember all those people who said the people speaking out against this were crazy that this type of creep was happening? Said it wouldn't happen, that it was only for the "greater good" and so on? Yeah, well buck the fuck up because this type of creep is happening all over the place in the tech world. And it almost always starts with people who have no actual programming/technical ability, who then worm their way into positions of power.

        For FreeBSD, this will pretty much drive people out and kill it. I

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          It'll only keep happening until a major group completely collapses until the weight of it's own virtue signalling.

          Kind of like how neogaf was full SJW pandering and it turned out the owner of the forum was raping women. Oops.

          FreeBSD will disappear from any significance it had left and people will learn from it as something to never do. History is already rerouting around social justice. The only people who don't realize this are the ones living in their bubbles.

          Any ideology that allows you to oppress and bu

          • by lgw ( 121541 )

            I hear what you're saying, but the Google social network icon next to your name tell me you don't really mean it.

          • by gweihir ( 88907 )

            It'll only keep happening until a major group completely collapses until the weight of it's own virtue signalling.

            I really hope you are right. Looks more like they just move on to the next project to destroy when they have totaled one. And, of course, it never was their fault.

        • I've been using, supporting and promoting FreeBSD for decades. Sadly, now that I'm aware of this change to the "Code of Conduct", I no longer can, nor will.

          The old Code of Conduct [] was fine. In contrast, this newer version comes across as taking sides in the culture war for the sake of taking sides and virtue signaling someone's proclamation of who they support.

          While looking into where this update came from, I did find this note from a quarterly status report, "Anne Dickison, our Marketing Director, has been overseeing the efforts to rewrite the Project's Code of Conduct to help make this a safe, inclusive, and welcoming community." From what I can tell, she's used her position in the FreeBSD Foundation to push this through. There was no public discussion nor debate on it by the members of the FreeBSD community before the change.

          Fortunately, there are other *BSDs out there.

      • by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @12:45PM (#56142536)

        It reminded me of one of those prison visitation posters reminding you of everything that's against the law. And WTF is a dead name? Like I can't say my dad's name because he's dead or some shit like that? No really I only just now googled it and it's retarded how like every fucking week there's a new word describing some kind new (completely nonsensical) gender or some new sexual orientation, or some way of identifying properties therein. Too bad the book [] was already out of date at publication.

        Though seriously, this is a really good way to piss off developers and either they become interested in something else, or they just fork it.

        • I used to operate under the naive assumption that language was used for communication. Slowly clued in that, for a lot of people, it's all about framing the argument or ideological battlefield in their favour.

          'Dead names' is one I find pathetic, since most of the time, the person is trying to conceal all the crap they did under their former (birth) name. Kinda like 'Actress' implies both the profession and gender, but by removing that word from the lexicon of acceptable usage, the people behind it somehow

        • by organgtool ( 966989 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @01:27PM (#56142840)

          And WTF is a dead name?

          I don't know but it sounds extremely insensitive to people who are currently grieving the loss of a loved one. Perhaps they should have stated "living impaired" name so that the language in the Code of Conduct wouldn't violate their Code of Conduct.

        • And WTF is a dead name?

          Two seconds on Google... Dead Name []

          The birth name of a person who has since changed their name (especially a transgender person).

      • This. It actually sounds like something I'd read on the Onion.

        Except that it is happening in multiple places. NBC, has reacted to Matt Lauer's sexual shenanigans by enacting a new set of workplace rules that sound like a nightmare. Employees are required to report their's or any other employee's romantic liasons to Human resources. Being a snitch is now required - you can get in trouble if you don't. There are very strict rules on hugging another employee. A quick hug, immediate relaease, then back away to avoid any further contact. Even MarySue hates it. https://ww []

    • ... but if I did, I would quit. This is over the top. It feels more like a blanket list of vague infractions to have on hand so that they can rid of anyone they feel like.

      Getting rid of anyone they feel like is essentially what at-will employment summarizes, which already exists in some form or another across the entire US.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yup. Many of the listed infractions will consist of little more than hurt feelings, which anyone can claim and no one can refute. That code becomes a weapon for SJWs to wield against anyone they decide deserves to be hurt. I would be terrified to interact with anyone in a community with such draconian feminist policies.

      • I don't really see the problem with it when it comes to open source communities. If you don't like a community, you can always fork the project and start your own offshoot. If all of the social justice sycophants want to congregate into one group that drives everyone else off, that's their own prerogative. If it gives them all their own little area to congregate in and leaves everyone else outside of the group who wants to get work done alone, all the better. It's almost like a self-organizing B Ark.
    • by Teun ( 17872 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:30AM (#56141978) Homepage
      I thought aren't these already implied forms of human conduct and interaction, in other words; nothing new?
      But apparently there are reasons to write it out for those that are lacking the required sensitivities for polite conduct.
    • It's impossible to create any practical rule governing human behaviour that enumerates every specific bad action. Just look at the law of any country, none of them are very specific.

      • by Chris Katko ( 2923353 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @01:29PM (#56142866)

        CoC falls apart for one fundamental reason: You can't legislate people to RESPECT each other.

        And that's what they're trying to codify. You can't make a legal document that solves disputes. For example, I have allergies and someone else in the office has a therapy dog. The RESPECTFUL thing to do, is to keep our offices as far apart as possible and both of US try to be accommodating to each other. But blanket statements of "disability person wins." only creates bitterness ("Why does that person always win?") and when you have a dispute between TWO disabled people, then you have to create a hierarchy of "who is a more disabled person?" (=more value).

        None of this actually creates a better working environment. You can't replace respect for each other with a list of rules. It's just another feel good idea by another middle manager with no basis in science.

    • ... but if I did, I would quit. This is over the top. It feels more like a blanket list of vague infractions to have on hand so that they can rid of anyone they feel like.

      sounds like this 'rubbed you' the wrong way.

    • Well, by the text of the Code of Conduct, most SJWs will be immediately banned. Because if the words say X, they mean X, right? Right??

  • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:07AM (#56141786) Journal

    Someone at FreeBSD needs a hug.

    On the Linux mailing list, "deliberate intimidation" is graded like a gymnastic routine, 1-10 points. Linus has the most points so far.

  • I kind of want to see what happens if FreeBSD forks into Conservative and Liberal branches. I want to see which side attracts more developers, and which distribution gets more downloads!

    • by rknop ( 240417 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:26AM (#56141948) Homepage

      Conservative and Liberal are insufficient tags nowadays.

      If you identify yourself as a liberal, you probably nowadays think of conservative as meaning (perhaps not self-acknowledge) white supremacy and Trumpism.

      If you identify yourself as a conservative, you probably nowadays think of liberal as meaning in favor of the kind of identity politics that leads to speech codes and censorship that begins to be reminiscent of Mao's cultural revolution.

      The thing is, there are people who would at least have traditionally identified themselves with both labels who aren't either of this, but still actually possess the ability to reason. Sadly, the current climate is allowing the white supremists to come out of the woodwork and go mainstream, and that in turn is convincing people who should otherwise know better to endorse the extremes of identity politics censorship.

      At the moment, the national liberal party in the US (the Democratic party) hasn't been caught up in the craziness of the left (i.e. overarching speech policies that consider saying "*hugs*" a form of agression), whereas the Republican party has at least partially been caught up in the craziness of the right (i.e. not recoiling from Trump). If anything, this makes the extremes of identity politics all the more insidious and dangerous. There need to be ways for people to stand up and point to the excesses of that without having to be identified with, or feel that perhaps they even must share a lot of values with, the jingoistic Trumpists of the world.

    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      Actually, this would make sense. In fact it's kind of the whole point.

      As a private association, the FreeBSD developers are free to adopt whatever code of conduct they want. They could even adopt a developer dress code if they wanted to, and they wouldn't be oppressing anyone because if you didn't want to wear a straw boater hat and a bow tie you could take your contributed code -- an everyone else's code -- and start your own developer group.

      In fact the only way to reconcile the freedom of a developer grou

    • define "developers", after Rust's patch that systematically rewrote the docs to de-genderise the text, I think you might see thousands of commits, all of which are pointless, on one of the forks.

  • by CptLoRes ( 4510239 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:12AM (#56141824)

    This Code of Conduct is based on the example policy from the Geek Feminism wiki.

    I am all for equal rights, but feminism is something else entirely.

    • by Megol ( 3135005 )

      No. The original use of the word describes equal rights for women. By using it to describe anything else you allow two groups to control your thoughts: the man hating movement and the women hating movement. Don't let them do that.

  • Good for them (Score:4, Insightful)

    by millert ( 10803 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:14AM (#56141838) Homepage

    Free software is all about community. I don't see anything in that list that I would *want* in my community. What's so controversial about having a policy that says you need to not be jerks to each other? This is behavior that would not be tolerated in a workplace or just about anywhere else.

    • Re:Good for them (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rknop ( 240417 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:20AM (#56141888) Homepage

      Consider this: one person says that they are disappointed that something in the code won't be accepted because it conflicts with something else that needs to be there. A second person says, "*hugs*" as an expression of sympathy in response. That second person is now on warning for violating community standards.

      Is THAT something you want in your community?

      This policy goes way beyond "don't be a jerk". This is the problem with speech restrictions like this. People point to "don't be a racist" and ask what's so bad about that. Yes, being racist is bad, and expressing it is a good reason for a community to ask you to step away! But that's not the only thing in here-- especially when you realize that terms like "reinforce systematic oppression" are easily interpreted to squelch very broad ranges of speech.

      Avoiding offense is a two-way street. It's not just those who speak having to avoid saying outrageous and offensive things. It's also those who listen having enough resilience to not need strict speech codes to avoid being offended, and to be able to put in context what others say to understand that there's no offense there.

      • Re:Good for them (Score:5, Interesting)

        by apoc.famine ( 621563 ) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .enimaf.copa.> on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:47AM (#56142102) Journal

        One of the most successful online communities I was ever part of had one single code of conduct: Don't be a dick.

        The community enforced that. And if there wasn't consensus, the founder decided.

        It wasn't perfect, but what it did was drive discussion on whether conduct someone was engaging in was dickish, or if the complainer was being a whiny dick. It forced discussion on where people's boundaries on "being a dick" were, and it helped people identify when their boundaries were way out of the norm compared to the rest of the community.

        In this it was a brilliantly simple code of conduct. Instead of rules-lawyering a laundry list of dos and don'ts, the discussion centered solely on the conduct of an individual and the interpretation of that conduct by those complaining about it. I find it far superior to these expansive codes of conduct, because these are essentially checklists of ways to harass someone you don't like, even if the context of their conversation with others was pleasant for all involved. If you're forced to consider every statement for intent, and determine if it rises to the level of a community defined understanding of "being a dick", it significantly limits the ability to complain about all but the most egregious conduct.

      • A second person says, "*hugs*" as an expression of sympathy in response. That second person is now on warning for violating community standards.

        I suspect that would not be the case. That portion of the policy was badly written. The fact that it includes "or after a request to stop" is instructive. If the first part of that sentence were intended to mean that any "hugs" without prior express consent was a violation, then the "or after a request to stop" would be completely unnecessary. One "hugs" probab

    • What's so controversial about having a policy that says you need to not be jerks to each other?

      It is more than the policy. It is one thing to say "here are some guidelines, some dos and dont's, now everybody act like a grown up" and another thing entirely to form a goon squad (the "committee") to act as enforcers. My hope is that this will not devolve to the point of what is going in the Rust community (just look at some of the comments posted here everytime a rust-related story pops up) and does not end up as an end unto itself.

      Personally, I would favor a code of conduct that jus

      • by DogDude ( 805747 )
        Personally, I would favor a code of conduct that just reads "Be excellent to each other, dude!"

        You must be new to the Internet.
    • by Megol ( 3135005 )

      If you don't like that some writes *hug*...
      How about my pet peeve, people that (_text_) sign their posts/emails/messages when their identity is already stated in the headers often cryptographically signed?

      I think if one shouldn't write*hug* then one shouldn't do something as idiotic as that - it's insulting and bandwidth wasting with no reason!

    • Re:Good for them (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @01:14PM (#56142746)

      Just for a sec, you’ve no doubt heard “Bros” having a conversation where every benign statement is turned into a sexual innuendo. I’ve stumbled into those conversations at various points in my life and have quickly discovered just how easily my words can be twisted to have meanings that are completely contrary to what I intended. It’s a frustrating, demeaning experience. We rightly condemn that sort of immature, offensive culture.

      Well, this is the exact same problem, but on the other end of the spectrum.

      Instead of twisting everything into a sexual innuendo, this “hair trigger” culture twists every benign statement into an offense. They deny through their actions that the listener shares a responsibility to not seek out offense. They reject having the patience and tolerance necessary to push past what was said so that they can understand what was intended to be said, ensuring that communication WILL break down. They exclude people dissimilar to themselves, ensuring they will never understand those others. They insist on legislating speech so that anyone who wants to communicate with them must do so on their terms, which they then use as an excuse to blame everyone else for the misunderstandings that inevitably occur. They’re like children who invented their own language and then insist that you speak to them in it.

      Having conversations with these people is just as frustrating and just as demeaning as having a conversation with the Bros, and while their motivations may be less degrading, their twisting of words is just as worthy of condemnation.

      Even when you have two “good” people talking, there are numerous opportunities for each to be offended. Whether they will or won’t be isn’t something you can legislate; it’s just part of being an adult. Moreover, any attempt to legislate acceptable speech will inevitably fail because the target is constantly moving. That’s why sane policies are based on principles, not rules.

    • Re:Good for them (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stephanruby ( 542433 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @06:22PM (#56144510)

      What's so controversial about having a policy that says you need to not be jerks to each other?

      Remember the school who suspended [] a teenager for two days because she was supposedly "inciting violence" with her anti-bullying video criticizing the school. That's what we're talking about here.

      With overly vague but very strict written rules, that means the people in charge of an organization are free to interpret and reinterpret the rules however it suits them.

      For instance, let's say x number of years from now, a FreeBSD committee chairman/president starts padding his/her expense reports with very large unrelated personal expenses, or holds a new election of board/committee members without telling anyone else about it but for a few of his/her personal friends.

      Would the rules below be used to silence / banish the members who are asking too many questions?

      Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease.

      Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent.

      Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes.

      Yes, you can bet they will. It's not that those rules necessarily have bad intentions.

      I can certainly see them being used against stalkers and bullies. It's just that those rules are so overly vague, they will certainly be abused if/when a bad actor, or bad actors, ever reach power.

  • What in the hell is a "dead name"?

    • What in the hell is a "dead name"?

      With all due respect, turn in your geek card.

      There's this book, the canonical list, whose title literally translates to "The Book of Dead Names", and every geek and nerd I've ever met has heard of it. Many own a copy.

      I thought everybody knew that.

      Ia f'tagn!

      • by CptLoRes ( 4510239 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:31AM (#56141988)
        Actually you are being to much of a geek, and not enough SJW. In this context a "dead name" is the previous name of a transgender before they changed. And yes, I had to google it.
      • by xeno ( 2667 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:52AM (#56142138)
        True but irrelevant. The Necronomicon has nothing to do with the social notion of a "dead name" which roughly translates to "Don't call me by the hated name my inauthentic narcissistic parents gave me, even though I have been too lazy or inconsistent to legally change it, yet I will become enraged and publicly insulting if you do not refer to me by an obtuse nickname I've only told to a handful of people I felt safe disclosing it to."

        With respect to the policy overall, it's like an angsty high-school kid exploded on the page, with a convoluted list of serious actual crimes intermixed with imagined slights and vague conditions defined by perception rather than action or intent. The list translates roughly to: "We're having technical difficulties adulting just now. Please leave us alone for a few years while we remove the sideways tampon from our sense of community, and ability to differentiate between criminal acts and mild transgressions that function as social lubricant. It's going to be a minute."

        In both cases: "TL;DR: Ignore me."
  • I was quite astonished by it.... I didn't even realize that it was any kind of issue, but all existing employees were expected to read and sign it, and any new hirees will also have to read and sign it before they can start work as well.
  • They really need to get rid of the "finger" command too.
  • It reads more like typical leftist liberal reasoning; an efficient tool to exclude and shut people down on the vaguest of merits, with complete disregard to a future victim's intentions behind what they said or did. Really, it's not very far from a fascist manifesto in disguise.
  • by Tokolosh ( 1256448 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:41AM (#56142064)

    FreeBSD obviously feels that this code of conduct, together with the associated concepts of diversity, inclusion and acceptance, will promote the quality, usefulness and innovation of their software.

    Let's take the opportunity to run an experiment. In five years, will FreeBSD be strong, admired and above all, be downloaded and used, compared to its less enlightened peers? Which paradigm will prevail?

    I propose that we revisit this topic yearly, to assess.

  • toxic documents (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lkcl ( 517947 ) <> on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:52AM (#56142132) Homepage

    codes of conduct are known for being extremely toxic. if you're someone reading this who doesn't understand that, look at the keywords: is there *anything* positive in them? just look at the word type, and substitute "positive" or "negative" instead of the actual word. then count the two types up, and ask yourself the question, "what kind of person do you think this would attract?"

    it would attract two types of people wouldn't it: one that is absolutely terrified of making mistakes - of being the kind of person that the document ACCUSES people of being. and the other type would be precisely the kinds of people MOST LIKELY to ignore such proscriptions and do them anyway.

    so what, *exactly*, do you think these kinds of documents achieve? they describe - and attract - the very things that people fear will happen, and at the very best poison (toxify) the working environment for absolutely everyone involved with the project.

    a much better approach would be to use something like the bill of ethics ( it's effectively a "forth normalised form" document, that "unpacks on demand". it defines what an "ethical act" is, and encourages and invites its upholders to act ethically. that *requires* that the participants think through incidents very carefully but WITHOUT having incredibly dangerous "toxic proscriptive lists"... which are never complete anyway.

    • I've found that workplaces without codes of conduct quickly become toxic. Or, if not an explicit code, the understanding that certain behavior is unacceptable. What the code does is spell it out so that there's no confusion. It also protects the organization when they need to dismiss someone for inappropriate behavior. They can point to the specific part of the code that was violated. Without a code in place, the person could argue he was wrongfully dismissed.
  • by CustomSolvers2 ( 4118921 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:53AM (#56142144) Homepage

    This code of conduct applies to all spaces

    And what about tabs, f*cking pieces of steaming sh*t? How can you dare to ignore my blank space and indentation identity? What are you, animals? LOL.

  • It is literally impossible to adhere to these restrictions, and most of the people violating them would do so purely by accident. I love the weird logic of neurodiversity too, this is basically pretending people with mental disabilities are A OK, or something. How do you know what anyone's preferred pronoun is before you ask them? Most people just ask for names, and infer pronouns - especially online. See, if you want to promote a good message you put out something along the lines that we should cherish ou
  • by buddyglass ( 925859 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @12:34PM (#56142446)
    ...which one of the things it bans do you think should be allowed?

    Reading through it, it seems pretty reasonable. If I were leading a team, I would not want someone on that team who would treat other team members in any of the ways this policy bans. Seems like it could be summed up as "Don't be a creep or an asshole."
    • by stdarg ( 456557 )

      Well here's the question for me:

      Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion. Unwelcome comments regarding a person's lifestyle choices and practices

      Consider that someone says "Hey everyone I want to let you know that I'm not a man anymore, I'm a woman, and I'd like you to call me Jane instead of Joe! Thanks!"

      Let's say that to me that's an unwelcome comment on that person's lifestyle choices. I don't want to hear about someone's sex change saga.

      So I say, "Hey, I don't like hearing about that, your comments are unwelcome so keep them off of this discussion forum."

      Now did I just point out a rule, so I'm right, or did I just

  • by ojintoad ( 1310811 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @02:24PM (#56143258)

    1) Summary indicates there are people who are annoyed. No actual links to annoyance.
    2) Summary indicates it's quoting a blog post. No blog post linked, just the rules page.
    3) The rules page has been around since 2015: [] - not that "new code of conduct" means that the writer intended to convey it was brand new, but certainly it will be interpreted that way by a lot of folks.
    4) FreeBSD had some sort of discussion around it when it came to be in 2015: [] and it looks like there was some actual internal stuff for project participants that occurred but again, nothing really happened
    5) This type of code of conduct isn't really crazy in the OSS world by a simple search. For example, https://www.contributor-covena... [] shows a plethora of OSS projects that participate and is based on similar principles. Big names OSS participants include Eclipse, Spring, Atom,
    6) Microsoft has code of conduct that touches on similar issues: []
    7) Github has a guide actively encouraging codes of conduct within communities: [] and pointing to other OSS projects that have them: []

    If you look at FreeBSD's code of conduct in context it really seems like they're late to the party, which may just be a formality (the community norms might already be enforcing these types of rules anyway) or a dramatic change, but there's no way to actually get that from the summary at all.

  • Undoing mod (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Shemmie ( 909181 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @02:27PM (#56143274)

    This whole topic is just... it's a fucking mess.

    I'd hug you all via text, but it'd be a hate crime.

  • by guruevi ( 827432 ) <evi AT evcircuits DOT com> on Saturday February 17, 2018 @03:45PM (#56143788) Homepage

    This is the continuation of this effort. They've destroyed the atheist movement, largely destroyed many 'level-headed' green, anti-capitalist and other liberal movements, all feminist and most if not all sex-positive communities, working hard on the movie and comic book communities and now we see inroads in tech, FreeBSD communities will soon be a wasteland of self-righteous bullshit.

    We're creating a generation of fascists with these kind of actions. Mark my words, when you can't see that hating white men is the same as hating male Jews, or female blacks, you are creating a power vacuum for people like Hitler on either side of the spectrum.

  • by Eravnrekaree ( 467752 ) on Saturday February 17, 2018 @04:53PM (#56144080)

    FreeBSD deleted the fortune program, I then knew that the system was really in decline at that point and has become self obsessed and moribund. Its like any other institution that becomes infected with the disease known as Liberalism, rather than being bold and innovative, creating new things, all it does is loath, become overly self critical loading itself down with endless rules and regulations, attacking and penalizing the more productive elements of society, while producing nothing of real value. It is an example of O Sullivans law.

<< WAIT >>