MESSAGE
DATE | 2021-04-29 |
FROM | Ruben Safir
|
SUBJECT | Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] Fwd: Leaving the GNU Guix community
|
lle-bout-at-zaclys.net
Hello! I feel like what has happened is really a disaster, I don't feel like contributing to GNU Guix anymore in the future. I think that the GNU Guix maintainers justify unacceptable behavior and have acted upon things without understanding them, not understanding why incidents have happened, and at the same time that I don't feel that I can explain, and that many people have spread misinformation that other believed also. I don't feel like there's any way forward to this, we really do not understand each other, I don't know how to communicate the culture in some feminist/queer squats in France around Paris where I live, where we really feel together on the same page when it comes to these questions and where also we exclude people who don't understand these goals, in which I feel so good and where really every confrontation is avoided and has many values that building an inclusive community like GNU Guix wants to be. I think that the technicality of software development must be redefined so that the hierarchy between the experienced and the beginner disappears, I think that to cast as a beginner or an experienced is an attitude, many people who are experienced cast themselves as beginners for various reasons and that some other people cast themselves as experienced for various other reasons. I think the difference between the beginner and the experienced is a construction, I think that such must be worked on so that every individual contributor can feel independent and empowered and also not have to define themselves towards the experienced. I think that the technicality of software development implies a special kind of relationship with knowledge and experience, I think that also must be re-invented, and in other social environments like the feminist/queer squats I live in knowledge and experience is a really sensitive topic and people who have knowledge and experience are not always welcome to say what they know or what they think unsolicited and if they are solicited, there's also a way to say that to never imply a domination of student-professor, that to accept that someone does not want to hear about supposed knowledge and experience, and also needs and wants to feel proud and independent about what they are doing without the help of people with said knowledge or experience. I think that in a sense, everyone must become a beginner. I think it approaches a very fundemental topic of software development especially in Free Software communities that is to among others end meritocracy. I think that the world of Free Software and Open Source is tainted by that meritocratic spirit and that if we want to bootstrap inclusive communities we must embrace that underrepresented people also are of very varrying skill levels and that we must empower and include everyone no matter their skill level, and that this notion even of skill level disappears and that all people of varrying skill levels are also not interested in feeling submitted to a pre-existing group of people with knowledge or experience. That we must find other ways, tools, to organize tolerance for mistakes, collectively, that errors become not problematic at all, or that the possibility for error is removed, to create systems that detect errors and only accept non-errorneous input, so that as long as the contribution is a valid input from anyone, it is a valid contribution, that there's no room for doubting, for having failed to, for being responsible, for being accountable, for being blamed, if the tool fails to detect errors then we are collectively responsible for improving the tool, not individually responsible for triggering a validation bug. The tool also must be friendly with the way it rejects input, it must be helpful, it must provide guidance, it must not leave anyone no matter who they are, no matter what they know, in a situation where they have no idea what to do to create a valid contribution. I think that inclusive tools remove the possibility for error. I think that good UI/UX is when you can't go wrong, and that if you do, it's easy to undo what you just done, always. I think that GNU Guix is many situations many things can go wrong and I think that's not inclusive, it pushes off many people because it induces important amounts of stress to realize things can be wrong and especially when you can't undo them. I think that somehow the tolerance for mistakes or errors from anyone must be absolute, so that it is never an issue they happen. I think that for example with the design of the web where HTML parsers are tolerant to errors, that with JavaScript there's nothing that can possibly go wrong with code you write, ideally nothing can possibly be a security issue (not the case with JavaScript on the web but I think that if we were given a chance to give another go we could fix it), I think that such error-tolerant design is one of the reasons that there's also so many JavaScript developers of very diverse skill levels, that to me it feels very inclusive. I think that there's ideas to take from there. I think also when we talk about practical software freedom, that we still have systems that can only be controlled by programmers, that the majority of people on earth are still bound to use tools they cannot control themselves. I think that to reach true practical software freedom everyone must be a "programmer", that controlling your system fully becomes so intuitive, so accessible, so inclusive also, because I think those topics are inevitably linked, that the need for "expert programmers" disappears. I think that software design is strongly entangled with the need for expertise and I think that for computing in general to become ethical as a whole the difference between a user and a developer, the words even, must disappear, become out of use, stop making sense. Léo _______________________________________________ Hangout mailing list Hangout-at-nylxs.com http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|