What to Do About The Linux COC

(An open letter to the Linux community.)

You need to decide for yourself how dire your circumstances are now that the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct (CCCOC) is in place. If you think the Social Justice capture of the Linux kernel is all-well-and-good, you need do nothing. Everything is running right on schedule.

But if you think this heralds the end of Linux as anything resembling a meritocracy (however flawed), as well as the beginning-of-the-end of a project that you love and depend on, then you need to take action. Nobody is coming to save you. You’re going to have to save yourselves.

Whereas the Social Justice Attack Survival Guide is a good defense, playing only defensively leaves the non Social Justice cohort of the Linux community indefinitely vulnerable to attack, individually and collectively. To end that vulnerability, you will need to achieve something very difficult. You will need to drive the rejection of the CCCOC, and demand restoration of the Code of Conflict (or perhaps the outright rejection of anything resembling a Code of Conduct at all).

You may ask, “Why should I have to do anything? They’re the ones who suck! They should do the right thing themselves, I shouldn’t have to make them.” And in a way, that’s all true – but it doesn’t matter. You can’t wait for “the management” to “come to their senses.” They have no incentive to change. You have to motivate them to change.

Here’s one form of motivation:

You go on strike.

Don’t resign. Don’t delete or disable your accounts. Keep them, because you’ll need them when this is over (if it ever is over). But stop volunteering:

  • Stop donating money. Email them and say how much you have given in the past, and why you won’t give any more.

  • Stop donating time and effort to commits. Email the project and list your commits, fixes, and features, and say why you won’t be committing any more.

  • Stop answering questions and writing documentation. Instead, respond along the lines of “I’d love to help … once the CCCOC is removed.”

  • If you are paid to work on the kernel, stop doing that work. Tell them why you are going on strike.

Go on strike, and speak up about having gone on strike, until the CCCOC is reverted and the Code of Conflict is put back in place. The longer you keep volunteering, the longer it looks like you are OK with the CCCOC.

They cannot survive (at least, not as easily) without your volunteer efforts. Stop volunteering, and speak out as to why you are stopping. Be prepared to do it for longer than you think you’ll have to.

Threats to their cash flow, to their free-resource flow, will be a serious motivator for them to listen to you.

That’s a starting point. If they need further motivation, their actions between now and later will make the followup approach more obvious.

Do it today. Not tomorrow, not next week, not “later” – today. The longer you wait, the more inertia will build up against you.

Now, I have to warn you: the consequences for you going on strike might be overwhelming. You are likely to find yourself the target of Social Justice, with all that entails. Each of you has to decide for yourself if you want to deal with that kind of fallout, and I’m not kidding when I say it is psychologically and emotionally draining. But you also have to decide for yourself if you want to just sit back and let Linux be co-opted in this way. The choice is yours.

And if you see someone else going on strike with you, support them.

Good luck.

Are you stuck with a legacy PHP application? You should buy my book because it gives you a step-by-step guide to improving your codebase, all while keeping it running the whole time.

27 thoughts on “What to Do About The Linux COC

  1. I just hope that no division in the community, and to be honest no forks, unless in the traditional way of forks
    We can beat this and your approach is reasonable.

    • What would be so bad about letting it go down the drain? I still can’t understand why they adopted the CCC of Conduct in the first place. Really, really stupid move if you ask me.
      What of all the sane contributors took their shit and started contributing for, say, FreeBSD or GNU Hurd or something along those lines.
      After all, Linux is just a kernel, not an operating system.
      Feel free to point out the stupidiity of my reasoning if you feel so inclined. Don’t worry, I am not easily offended. In fact, I cherish the opportunity to be enlightened.

      • There is no stupidity there. In fact, that would be next steps. Forking Linux or contributing to a project that doesn’t have this BS (Though probably not Hurd…FSF’s got their own sins in this little regard with how they did and framed the GPL/LGPL/etc. version 3. Linus explained it quite succinctly in a Q&A session that is up on YouTube on this subject…)

  2. It is the duty of all sane, responsible people to oppose the SJW cult in all of its forms, wherever it exists, and whenever it attempts to. The Linux CoC is just another (successful so far) attempt to impose PC tyranny/censorship/repression on the Linux community.

    There is no evidence that the Linux/FOSS community has ever been intolerant and hateful towards anyone. With some effort, a few example of sexism, racism, etc. could no doubt be found (could they?). However, they would be dwarfed by the staggering volume of invective and hatred targeting whites, males, conservatives, Christians, etc. The fact that anyone can contribute with whatever degree of anonymity has always assured that equality prevails.

    Three points come immediately to mind.

    The author of the CoC is Coraline Ada Ehmke. To call him/her/it/? an extremist would be a bit of an understatement. He/she/it/? is a fanatical opponent of “meritocracy’. He/she/it/? has literally said “Meritocracy is a dystopian delusion and needs to be rooted out wherever it takes hold” (I guess the real world has to go). A better argument might that Coraline and his/her/its/? “allies” need to be rooted out wherever they have taken hold.

    Coraline has stated that “humanity” is more important than competence. What does “humanity” mean to him/her/it? Nothing less than unthinking, unquestioning devotion to her/his/its/? notion of ideological purity. If you think for yourself, you are not “humane” and must be expelled.

    The following Tweet show how tolerant he/she/it/? is.

    “Punch diversity of thought in the face”

    Of course, we have been here before. Under Mao, the dominant ideology was straight from Caroline (“better red than expert’). Predictably, 10s of millions died from starvation as a consequence. The Nazis had “Jewish Science”. The list of ideological fanatics goes on and on

    Some folks have argued that criticizing Coraline is an ad-hominem attack. That’s a valid point. However, focusing just on the CoC doesn’t make it any better. The following is a quote from the CoC.

    ““In the interest of fostering an open and welcoming environment, we as contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.””

    Sounds reasonable (it isn’t). However, notice what’s missing. According to the CoC it’s entirely OK to attack people for their nationality, politics, social class, and/or criminal history. However, there is more to the CoC.

    “Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting”

    In other words, if you dare to utter a non-PC thought anywhere, you will be attacked, shunned, banned, and exiled. Don’t believe me. Take a look at the OpalGate debacle (Coraline was a major player in that one). A person by the name of Elia made comments on Twitter that trans activists didn’t like. Whatever the merits of his comments, they had nothing to do with his contributions to the Open Source community. Coraline insisted that he be expelled anyway.

    Of course, it gets worse. A person (he/she/it/?) by the name of Sage Sharp attacked a Linux TAB member by the name of Ted Tso, as a “rape apologist”. What horrible thing did Ted Tso actually do? He use actual statistics to debunk feminist lies about the prevalence of rape. See “[LCA2011-Chat] Some Anti-Harassment Policies considered harmful”. Anyone can read Ted Tso’s online comments and see that he is no ‘rape apologist’. The charge is patently absurd.

    So why did Sage Sharp go bonkers when Ted Tso’s only crime was using facts? Because SJW’s are a cult with set of “Sacred Beliefs”. Sacred Beliefs don’t have to be true, indeed most are crazy fictions. However, they are Sacred. Ted Tso committed the ultimate crime of challenging a Sacred Belief with facts. Just as in Mao’s China or the USSR under Stalin, the worst possible crime is a thought crime.

    It almost like he dared to suggest that the Earth orbits the Sun. Everyone knows that’s a fiction.

    This note should how that the CoC isn’t harmless or “just being nice”. It is an attempt on the part of vile people to impose their Fascism, bigotry, and hate on everyone else. Fight SJW Fascism. Fight the PC Gestapo. Fight them now. Fight them forever.

  3. I don’t understand this “no meritocracy” thing, at all. Big companies like Google and Microsoft can afford this nonsense, but open source communities cannot. The open source community depends primarily on doing the best to achieve the best outcome. Basically this ridiculous CoC seems like saying “let’s accept this guy’s commits to the Linux kernel because they’re oppressed”, and not because he’s doing a good job or fixed a problem properly. I don’t even understand how that will work. Big companies can hire low IQ morons because they can pay them, even if they don’t submit any commits or even work, and even if it costs them more than they provide, because appeasing the government makes them earn more eventually. But what is it the open source community expected to do and who are we expected to appease? This is the weird thing I don’t understand! Anyone who doesn’t like Linux can go ahead and use Windows. Linux never tried to attract people as aggressively as Windows did (and I’m a Windows and Linux user, btw). Linux drew people to it ONLY BECAUSE IT’S GOOD. If Linux starts accepting commits from any “supposedly oppressed” group, just to appease them, then Linux will be easily destroyed, because it’ll become a crappy product that no one can make use of.

    Remember that this war is all about power. Accepting such nonsensical CoC will just mean that you can fire your enemies and hire your friends with a made-up scandal. Just wait for a random woman to step up and claim that you sexually assaulted her, and you’re done for life. No evidence needed. No investigation needed. This is the new world we live in, and until this new world is fixed, DO NOT ACCEPT THIS CoC. We’re smarter than this!

    Some example of a scenario to fear in the context of being accused of assault: Intel pushes for some new instruction for random number generators to be integrated into /dev/random (which is nothing new), and some smart guy in Linux refuses to do it… out of the blue, a woman may step up and claim that this guy raped her 20 years ago… nothing but a coincidence. Isn’t that sufficient to destroy a man in our world? Does anyone dare tell me this is not realistic?

    Think about it. No good can come out of SJW nonsense.

  4. Such actions would be very much welcome by those who you oppose to. Rest assured that even if all CoC opponents would leave, the rest would be doing just fine, maybe slower, maybe with more hiccups, but all in all fine and with a huge ideological push, because it would be them who remained, them who won, thus making them even stronger. The logic of your idea indeed boggles my mind, starting great projects up and after years of super hard work, just when they become super successful, leave them behind to your enemy to reap the benefits?

    Also please don’t be fooled. The issue of CoCs is in no way a problem of Linux community or of any other project, which accepted it, and as such nothing Linus said or done was basis of it being accepted. These CoCs are pure ideological tools of power used to instantiate and maintain ideological hegemony. Remember, it’s not what Linus said or done they’re fighting against, it’s Linus and his supporters themselves.

    To all who read this: “Stay right where you are, find out what your values and identity are and then fight for them.”


  5. This sjw code of conduct is a travesty and will be used to discriminate against the best and most productive. The meritocracy is the ideal. Unprofessional behavior does not belong in the collaboration either. People don’t have to respect each others political views, sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, or nationality but as professionals working together in rational self interest it is the quality of the work that should prevail. The reasonable code of conduct should be no more discussion of these political or social issues in the context of software development. They don’t belong. The code is neutral, the developers should be also.

  6. Does anybody knows how I as an individual, not a programmer, help those opposed to the new CoC. Like get signatures of people against it or sth like that?

    • Don’t use their crap. As soon as there’s a clear fork or other path, you LEAVE.

      You don’t support them, period.

    • Those that stay away from politics find themselves enmeshed in it anyhow.

      Politics is an aspect of human nature- and it’s this “avoidance” of anything political that ends up making a vacuum that draws the likes of Corline into the fray.

      You may not have an interest there with Politics, but when you don’t involve yourself, it takes an interest in you and down that path only lies tears as we’re seeing.

  7. I appreciate your efforts, Paul, but I don’t think it will work. This is a power play and there is big money behind it. Be prepared for big push backs from Google and the other big tech companies, because they actually support this nonsense.

    In my opinion a fork will be the inevitable outcome, unfortunately. How successful it will be will depend on the community’s commitment.

    • Indeed. That’s what I see coming. Either we throw all of it into a fork or an alternate solution and ensure that this never comes to pass again.

      If it requires a modified GPL v. 2 license, so be it.

  8. Mr. Jones,

    I thought I would suggest an addition to your well developed argument. Often, the phrase “level playing field” is injected into intersectional disagreements, so, you have to ask yourself, is there ever a “level playing field” on a ladder to hell?

  9. I am by no means a social justice warrior. I just wonder why there is such a backlash to the idea of a code of conduct. The code of conduct is not saying you must allow crappy code, just that you must treat someone who is writing crappy code with fairness and respect. Or in other words, behave in a good way towards people who you are working with. Why is that such a threatening concept?

    • “… fairness and respect. … [B]ehave in a good way towards people who you are working with.”

      That’s a motte-and-bailey statement; it’s #FakeNice. See http://paul-m-jones.com/archives/6214 for more on the motte-and-bailey, along with examples of how the proponents of the Contributor Covenant (and other #SocialTerrorist codes of conduct) actually behave (e.g. Opalgate).

      • Ah, I see you are using a motte-and-bailey argument to try and convince me that I am.

        I don’t want people to be #FakeNice, can’t they learn how to actually _be_ nice.

        • > I see you are using a motte-and-bailey argument

          All right, let’s go with that for a moment, anonymous commenter: what statements do you think I am using for the motte, and what for the bailey?

          • The motte is the world where you don’t need a CoC, what on earth could that possibly add to any open source project, the bailey where you are free to use privilege and position to keep out anyone who challenges the comfortable world, or maybe withdraw support and/or contribution to OSS to prevent any change that feels threatening.

            I’m not saying I really think this, just that it’s a very easy case to make either way.

          • > where you don’t need a CoC

            You’ll need to quote me saying that.

            Be careful, here, not to equate “a CoC” (which means *any* code) with specifically the Contributor Covenant or somewhat more generally the set of Social Justice derived Codes of Conduct. Indeed, I have linked to what I consider more-reasonable codes, and even offered one (http://paul-m-jones.com/archives/6878).

  10. I wasn’t quoting you, I was making the kind of knee-jerk assumptions (based on the posts you pointed me to) that you made about me from my comments.

    Your obvious bias against some perceived threat from “Social Justice” leads you to equate the political with the personal. People, who may be politically motivated, are attempting to help improve non-political discourse within what is traditionally a white male dominated field. I’m a white male but I am still able to understand the difference between the person who is fighting and the values they are fighting for.

    As someone who thinks about these things as much as you obviously do, perhaps your time could be better spent working with the movement. Imagine if you helped improve the CoC in ways that would help people with similar views to yourself from feeling so threatened by it.

    At the end of the day, we’re all just people.

    • Your obvious defense of a feelings based thing means you should absolutely no say in things of this nature.


      I can point to many, many things, that your notions got people killed over because these notions have no place in areas where it’s driven by things like gravity, physics, etc. But I’ll name two items that highlight this:

      Challenger Disaster

      Both happened because of notions as the ones you espouse. You have no business, no place talking about ANY such thing there. You’re one of the class that would butcher people out of negligence because it’s preferable in feelings to the other.

      If you can’t stand this world, stay out of it and don’t meddle. You’ll have blood on your hands otherwise.

  11. Linus has fallen. They been after him for a while. Lets have a moment of silence for that young hacker from Finland who freely shared something cool.

  12. I’ve been a linux user since 2005. Yesterday, I did a copy of all my data from my internal ext4 HD to an external NTFS disk, then, formatted, installed Windows 10.

    I’ll not wait until it becomes buggy and unsafe. I can’t trust and I’ll not trust in a system made by SJW.

    Linux Kernel
    ☆ 1991
    ✝ 2018

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *