Re: [Python-ideas] Re: Amend PEP-8 to require clear, understandable comments instead of Strunk & White Standard English comments
Hello, Shouldn't such feedback be also cross-posted to the python-dev mailing list? Also note the original pull request, https://github.com/python/peps/pull/1470, and differences of what was written in the pull request description and what went in the commit message. On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 22:10:14 +0200 "Giampaolo Rodola'" <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
From: https://github.com/python/peps/commit/0c6427dcec1e98ca0bd46a876a7219ee4a9347...
Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without upholding relics of white supremacy. Many native English speakers do not use Standard English as their native dialect, so requiring conformation to Standard English centers whiteness in an inappropriate and unnecessary way, and can alienate and put up barriers for people of color and those whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement.
This has nothing to do with making the wording "clear and understandable" (I agree on that). It's about, once again, bringing race-based politics into Python, and spreading hate towards a specific group of people: whites. Whether you're aware of it or not, there is a term for this: it's racism. I want to remind everyone that most of us here simply want to contribute code. We do it for free, and don't want to be involved in "this", because frankly it's disgusting. Doing something out of passion and for free, and at the same time seeing these sorts of things happening on a regular basis, looks and feels like an insult, and will only lead to people leaving this place.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:27 PM Keara Berlin <kearaberlin@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all, this is a very small change, but I thought I would field it here to see if anyone has suggestions or ideas. Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, PEP-8 should require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without alienating or putting up barriers for people (especially people of color) whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement. This change may even make the requirement more clear to people who are not familiar with Strunk & White, since for programmers, the main relevant aspect of that standard is "be clear and concise;" simply saying that instead of referencing Strunk & White may communicate this more effectively. Here is the current line in PEP-8: "When writing English, follow Strunk and White." I propose changing this line to "When writing English, ensure that your comments are clear and easily understandable to other English speakers." _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/AE2M7K... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
-- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com
It's broadly accepted among professional writers that the language used should be acceptable and comprehensible to the audience. This seems uncontentious. Posting a straightforward change representing a relaxation of standards (which were not in any case being enforced) should also be uncontentious. The commit message used, however, reveals implementation details of the change which are irrelevant to the stated aim, which is making the documentation clear and concise. Use of such language is certainly regrettable, since it carries with it the implication that the Python developer community has somehow been wilfully sanctioning "relics of white supremacy" up until the change was made. There certainly is a place in tech for politics, as I have argued many times, and I am sure nobody wishes to continue to use language that might be offensive to readers. But I would suggest that the politics can safely be omitted from commit messages, since they can only properly be fully addressed in the conversation about the PR in advance. The wording of the commit message has the appearance (probably specious) of wanting to rub former misdeeds in the face of a largely innocent community, and that is the principal reason I found it distasteful and unnecessary. Kind regards, Steve PS: I also think there is still room for the PEP to remind writers that many readers of the documentation who graciously allow us to use English without complaint are using it as their second or even third language, and all writers should be sympathetic to their needs as a matter of professional courtesy. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 10:18 PM Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Shouldn't such feedback be also cross-posted to the python-dev mailing list? Also note the original pull request, https://github.com/python/peps/pull/1470, and differences of what was written in the pull request description and what went in the commit message.
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 22:10:14 +0200 "Giampaolo Rodola'" <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
From:
https://github.com/python/peps/commit/0c6427dcec1e98ca0bd46a876a7219ee4a9347...
Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without upholding relics of white supremacy. Many native English speakers do not use Standard English as their native dialect, so requiring conformation to Standard English centers whiteness in an inappropriate and unnecessary way, and can alienate and put up barriers for people of color and those whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement.
This has nothing to do with making the wording "clear and understandable" (I agree on that). It's about, once again, bringing race-based politics into Python, and spreading hate towards a specific group of people: whites. Whether you're aware of it or not, there is a term for this: it's racism. I want to remind everyone that most of us here simply want to contribute code. We do it for free, and don't want to be involved in "this", because frankly it's disgusting. Doing something out of passion and for free, and at the same time seeing these sorts of things happening on a regular basis, looks and feels like an insult, and will only lead to people leaving this place.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:27 PM Keara Berlin <kearaberlin@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all, this is a very small change, but I thought I would field it here to see if anyone has suggestions or ideas. Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, PEP-8 should require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without alienating or putting up barriers for people (especially people of color) whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement. This change may even make the requirement more clear to people who are not familiar with Strunk & White, since for programmers, the main relevant aspect of that standard is "be clear and concise;" simply saying that instead of referencing Strunk & White may communicate this more effectively. Here is the current line in PEP-8: "When writing English, follow Strunk and White." I propose changing this line to "When writing English, ensure that your comments are clear and easily understandable to other English speakers." _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/AE2M7K...
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
-- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/66T2R6G3... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:31 AM Steve Holden <steve@holdenweb.com> wrote:
The commit message used, however, reveals implementation details of the change which are irrelevant to the stated aim, which is making the documentation clear and concise. Use of such language is certainly regrettable, since it carries with it the implication that the Python developer community has somehow been wilfully sanctioning "relics of white supremacy" up until the change was made.
There certainly is a place in tech for politics, as I have argued many times, and I am sure nobody wishes to continue to use language that might be offensive to readers. But I would suggest that the politics can safely be omitted from commit messages, since they can only properly be fully addressed in the conversation about the PR in advance. The wording of the commit message has the appearance (probably specious) of wanting to rub former misdeeds in the face of a largely innocent community, and that is the principal reason I found it distasteful and unnecessary.
I just re-read the commit message, and I think you're being oversensitive and imagining things that aren't there. The actual commit message is written in a straightforward and factual way, and spends special effort on *absolving* the community of this kind of guilt. In particular, it emphasizes that the new text is accomplishing "the same goal", "maintaining the original intent", and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there. Merely mentioning the concept of white supremacy is not an attack on you or the community [1]. -n [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_defensiveness -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
Thank you. I understand the need for tolerance in such matters since opinions vary, and merely wished to voice my own. If I am being oversensitive it is perhaps because I have trodden in these waters before, and have frequently been surprised by what other people find distasteful or offensive. I do not necessarily require my opinions to be thought reasonable, even by other reasonable people. Kind regards, Steve On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:22 AM Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
The commit message used, however, reveals implementation details of the change which are irrelevant to the stated aim, which is making the documentation clear and concise. Use of such language is certainly regrettable, since it carries with it the implication that the Python developer community has somehow been wilfully sanctioning "relics of white supremacy" up until the change was made.
There certainly is a place in tech for politics, as I have argued many times, and I am sure nobody wishes to continue to use language that might be offensive to readers. But I would suggest that the politics can safely be omitted from commit messages, since they can only properly be fully addressed in the conversation about the PR in advance. The wording of the commit message has the appearance (probably specious) of wanting to rub
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:31 AM Steve Holden <steve@holdenweb.com> wrote: former misdeeds in the face of a largely innocent community, and that is the principal reason I found it distasteful and unnecessary.
I just re-read the commit message, and I think you're being oversensitive and imagining things that aren't there. The actual commit message is written in a straightforward and factual way, and spends special effort on *absolving* the community of this kind of guilt. In particular, it emphasizes that the new text is accomplishing "the same goal", "maintaining the original intent", and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there. Merely mentioning the concept of white supremacy is not an attack on you or the community [1].
-n
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_defensiveness
-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
On 29/06/2020 11:31, Steve Holden wrote:
If I am being oversensitive it is perhaps because I have trodden in these waters before, and have frequently been surprised by what other people find distasteful or offensive. I do not necessarily require my opinions to be thought reasonable, even by other reasonable people.
I don't think you are being insensitive, I too found that commit message offensive. Personally I think equating standardised English -- specifically Strunk and White -- with racist supremacy is itself a racist remark which should not have been made. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 12:43:18 +0100 Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 11:31, Steve Holden wrote:
If I am being oversensitive it is perhaps because I have trodden in these waters before, and have frequently been surprised by what other people find distasteful or offensive. I do not necessarily require my opinions to be thought reasonable, even by other reasonable people.
I don't think you are being insensitive, I too found that commit message offensive. Personally I think equating standardised English -- specifically Strunk and White -- with racist supremacy is itself a racist remark which should not have been made.
From the outside, this does seem like a reasonable position. Also, more generally, while I'm sure there are elaborate sociohistorical arguments to be made about the influence of prejudice (for example gendered or racist) on language, a Python commit message is not the place to elaborate such a theory. If this is important to you, perhaps one direction is to propose your edits to the corresponding Wikipedia page (which doesn't seem to list such criticism currently): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Style IMHO, the fact that the "Strunk & White standard" is not known by everybody (it's certainly not by me) was enough of a reason to remove that wording and replace it with a clearer phrasing. Regards Antoine.
On 29/06/2020 21:40, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
IMHO, the fact that the "Strunk & White standard" is not known by everybody (it's certainly not by me) was enough of a reason to remove that wording and replace it with a clearer phrasing.
Or perhaps to amplify on why something like S&W is a good guide (and not a standard) in how to write formal English? If you aren't interested in the nuts and bolts of the English language there's no reason for you to know of Strunk and White, the Chicago Manual of Style or any of a number of other similar books on the subject. They are all useful to someone who intends to write much, though. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
On 6/29/20 6:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there.
I would say that say that I have seen the term "relic" being used as a 'weaponized' word to imply that the old thing WAS there intentionally as a repressive measure. I am not saying that this usage was intended to be used that way, but just as the old wording was taken as offensive to some due to implication, I can see that message as offensive to others due to implication, all because some people are easy to offend. -- Richard Damon
I believe I'm not the only one with this question but, how is Strunk & White connected with white supremacy? Scanning through this thread, its wikipedia page and doing quick google search, I wasn't able to find something tangible. Best Regards, Jim Fasarakis Hilliard
Hello, On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:35:08 +0300 "Jim F.Hilliard" <d.f.hilliard@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe I'm not the only one with this question but, how is Strunk & White connected with white supremacy?
I wouldn't be surprised if the only connection between them is the word "white".
Scanning through this thread, its wikipedia page and doing quick google search, I wasn't able to find something tangible.
Best Regards,
Jim Fasarakis Hilliard
-- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:50 PM Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the only connection between them is the word "white".
I would be *very* surprised. This seems very foreign to me as a European.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 5:04 AM Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:35:08 +0300 "Jim F.Hilliard" <d.f.hilliard@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe I'm not the only one with this question but, how is Strunk & White connected with white supremacy?
I wouldn't be surprised if the only connection between them is the word "white".
It's not Strunk and White per se, it's the idea of enforcing "standard English", where "standard" here means "talks like a American with an Ivy league education". You all are displaying breathtakingly levels of ignorance here. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant – we can't be experts in everything, and your education probably didn't spend a lot of time talking about the long history of language "standards" and the many ways they've been used, intentionally, systematically, and violently to enforce racist/classist/etc. policies. But using a thread on python-dev to make clueless speculations like this is *incredibly* inappropriate and offensive. I'm not going to try to educate you on that history – it's completely off-topic for this list, and you can do your own work if you care to. But let's let this thread die here. -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:21 PM Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
It's not Strunk and White per se, it's the idea of enforcing "standard English", where "standard" here means "talks like a American with an Ivy league education".
You all are displaying breathtakingly levels of ignorance here.
I definitely am, hence why I asked the question in the first place. As it is currently written it isn't clearly understandable to non-US based people. I just wish that the original email or the commit message did a better job in justifying this for the rest of us. But let's let this thread die here.
+1
Hello, On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 06:21:36 -0700 Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 5:04 AM Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:35:08 +0300 "Jim F.Hilliard" <d.f.hilliard@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe I'm not the only one with this question but, how is Strunk & White connected with white supremacy?
I wouldn't be surprised if the only connection between them is the word "white".
It's not Strunk and White per se, it's the idea of enforcing "standard English", where "standard" here means "talks like a American with an Ivy league education".
Someone might wonder why 2 US American people (the author of the commit message and yourself), in the wake of events happening in that country, take so much effort to untangle the situation with English usage for people for whom English is not native. But not me. Events happen (in the whole world, not just a particular country), and in general I consider having opinions is quite normal. And thanks for yours.
You all are displaying breathtakingly levels of ignorance here. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant – we can't be experts in everything, and your education probably didn't spend a lot of time talking about the long history of language "standards" and the many ways they've been used, intentionally, systematically, and violently to enforce racist/classist/etc. policies. But using a thread on python-dev to make clueless speculations like this is *incredibly* inappropriate and offensive.
I'm not going to try to educate you
Dude, you totally aren't going to. So please leave your supremacist, center-of-the-world patronizing tone behind. Thank you.
-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
-- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com
On 29/06/2020 15:02, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 06:21:36 -0700 Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
You all are displaying breathtakingly levels of ignorance here. [snippety snip]
I'm not going to try to educate you
Dude, you totally aren't going to. So please leave your supremacist, center-of-the-world patronizing tone behind. Thank you.
OK guys, enough. Paul, you were trying to be good here, but your previous comment was flamebait. Nathaniel, that was exceptionally patronising, and I do somewhat take offense. Both of you know better, now please behave like it. (Yes, I'm allowed to get offended. I'm half Welsh, growing up on the English side of the border with an obviously Welsh name. I know all about language and racism, thank you very much.) -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 06:21:36 -0700 Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
You all are displaying breathtakingly levels of ignorance here.
Ah... How about you drop the condescending tone, Nathaniel? You certainly can make your point without attacking your fellow contributors.
But using a thread on python-dev to make clueless speculations like this is *incredibly* inappropriate and offensive.
Yawn. Regards Antoine.
On 06/29/2020 06:21 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
It's not Strunk and White per se, it's the idea of enforcing "standard English", where "standard" here means "talks like a American with an Ivy league education".
I believe the issue is writing, not talking.
There's nothing wrong with being ignorant – we can't be experts in everything, and your education probably didn't spend a lot of time talking about the long history of language "standards" and the many ways they've been used, intentionally, systematically, and violently to enforce racist/classist/etc. policies.
You mean like whole languages dying out because the "educators" and governments would persecute, prosecute, and even execute those who spoke it? Elements of Style is a tool, and unless there is text in it the supports or encourages such behavior, or its authors supported or encouraged such behavior, then equating it with such behavior is preposterous.
I'm not going to try to educate you on that history – it's completely off-topic for this list, and you can do your own work if you care to.
E. B. White was born in New York -- I believe that's in the northern part of the United States, otherwise known as "The North" or the side that fought to end slavery. E. B. White was educated at Cornell. A morning spent searching was unable to find references to E. B. White being a racist, having racist writings, or supporting racism. Any links I missed would be appreciated. An article that has good things to say about the advice of Elements of Style: https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/grammar-language-racist-racially-charged-an... And an excellent article here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/376368?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents talks about the built-in sexism in Elements of Style, but no commentary on racism (of course, the point of that article is about sexism). The article is from 1979, so hopefully the newer editions are better on that count (my copy hasn't arrived yet). A not-great article, White Fears of Dispossession: Dreyer's English, The Elements of Style,and the Racial Mapping of English Discourse, here: http://radicalteacher.library.pitt.edu/ojs/radicalteacher/issue/view/19/25 It start on page 22. Its "proof" is in excerpts from other similar writings, but the excerpts from Elements of Style are only short phrases. Again, any links to research would be appreciated. I am happy to learn, but I require more than one person's statement that such a thing is so. As an example, the above Enquirer article has plenty of examples proving its supposition. ----- I don't think there's much to be gained by discussing this any further; I, for one, would much rather discuss the technical details of cPython development. -- ~Ethan~
On 01/07/2020 21:01, Ethan Furman wrote:
A not-great article, White Fears of Dispossession: Dreyer's English, The Elements of Style,and the Racial Mapping of English Discourse, here:
http://radicalteacher.library.pitt.edu/ojs/radicalteacher/issue/view/19/25
Thanks for posting this. (What a lot of work you must've done to find it.) As a result I feel I have a much better understanding of the environment in which these thought processes (those displayed in the commit message) would be considered rational, even admirable. Food for thought.
E. B. White was born in New York -- I believe that's in the northern part of the United States, otherwise known as "The North" or the side that fought to end slavery.
E. B. White was educated at Cornell.
We should acknowledge that he famously showed an interest in web development and invented a sort of mouse. ;-) Jeff Allen
On 2020-07-02 22:17, Jeff Allen wrote:
On 01/07/2020 21:01, Ethan Furman wrote:
A not-great article, White Fears of Dispossession: Dreyer's English, The Elements of Style,and the Racial Mapping of English Discourse, here:
http://radicalteacher.library.pitt.edu/ojs/radicalteacher/issue/view/19/25
Thanks for posting this. (What a lot of work you must've done to find it.) As a result I feel I have a much better understanding of the environment in which these thought processes (those displayed in the commit message) would be considered rational, even admirable. Food for thought.
I found the language difficult to understand. For example, "in the midst and post the election" instead of "during and after the election". And multiply-stacked nouns. And nouns used as verbs. Much like "management-speak". If you believe you have something important to say, then at least say it clearly.
E. B. White was born in New York -- I believe that's in the northern part of the United States, otherwise known as "The North" or the side that fought to end slavery.
E. B. White was educated at Cornell.
We should acknowledge that he famously showed an interest in web development and invented a sort of mouse. ;-)
@Inada-sama: For RFC conformance to S&W, see footnote [3] at the end. MRAB writes:
If you believe you have something important to say, then at least say it clearly.
Indeed -- that commit log is an example of the kind of writing the reference to Strunk & White was intended to reduce; repetitive, jargon-filled, and mostly unnecessary to make the point.[1] Ironic, but not the only irony to be found in this commit. Because I have seen the deterrent effect in action -- *it is real* -- I'd be sympathetic to this change if I hadn't directly experienced the value of a rule set like that in Strunk & White in teaching non-native speakers about writing English for technical purposes. Since I believe an admonition to "write clear and easily understandable English" is a deterrent too, especially for non-natives, I would prefer deleting the whole thing to this change, though. The claim is that requiring Strunk & White deters PoC. I believe it. But by discarding all rules, this change "centers" English-speakers at the expense of the needs of large populations of *non-native-speaking* PoC. Many non-natives would benefit from adopting some of the advice in Strunk & White for *writing* clearly, and if others follow that advice, it would easier for them to *read*.[2] Don't take my word for it: Naoki Inada testifies to both issues in his post about "RFC English".[3] It has also been claimed that many neuro-atypical folks find detailed rules comforting, as opposed to broad admonitions of that kind. Seems plausible, but I can't speak to it from personal experience or testimony of acquaintances. But if so, removing all reference to concrete rules for clear writing harms and deters them, too. But "practice what you preach" is a fallacy, I guess. "Do what I say, not what I do" is the way of the world. Given human fallibility, maybe this is a not-bad thing, to focus on the merits of folks' speech rather than the demerits of their actions.... *shrug* As I see it, in order of importance, we could say the following about comments in Python: 1. Comments should not say anything that a programmer with some experience can read directly from the code, taken out of the larger context. That eliminates a lot of problematic text right off the bat! :-) 2. Write comments in English. It is the lingua franca [sic!] of programming, for better or worse, and Python development is an international community of programmers. (The language may change, see "sic!" above. Boy, would I enjoy watching some folks struggle with Hindi or Chinese.) 3. Write in a comfortable dialect[4]. (Exceptions: legalese and The Academic Register are strictly forbidden, even if you're native in one of those. :-) 4. Write clear and easily understandable comments, remembering that many potential readers are not native speakers, let alone native in "Standard" English. 5. For advice on writing clearly, Zinsser is a good textbook on writing to communicate. Strunk & White is a concise collection of concrete rules with examples of usage that help many to write more clearly, and its table of contents serves as a somewhat Petersian "Zen of Technical Writing". (There may be better alternatives to both for those purposes, but I don't know of any.) We could probably get 1-4 into two and a half lines, by leaving out the jokes and rationale. 5 would probably take a couple more lines. Or we could just delete the whole thing, which is probably more advisable than laying a burden of clarity and intelligibility we ourselves could not bear on non-native and non-Standard speakers. Regards, Steve Footnotes: [1] I'm not sure why. The OP to Python-Ideas was well-written. [2] Reading is easier partly because most of the world values Standard[sic] (American) English or standard (British) English above other dialects, which is clearly a holdover from "centering whiteness". But also because many of Strunk & White's rules really do encourage writing clearly without privileging any dialect (or even language -- I use those rules effectively in writing Japanese, to the extent I can write effective Japanese ;-). [3] Yes, Naoki, I'd say RFC English is conformant to Strunk & White, especially in the important ways. However, RFC English is further constrained and by conventions like RFC 2119 "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate requirement levels". Much of the more complex content is expressed in formal grammars and pseudo-code. So RFC English not really a fair test of whether Strunk & White would be useful to programmers. Unfortunately, there's no style guide I know of for RFC authors we could cite here -- you learn by getting screamed at on IETF lists. ;-) [4] Maybe "style" is a better word, though inaccurate and ambiguous in this context.
On 2020-07-04 16:23, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
@Inada-sama: For RFC conformance to S&W, see footnote [3] at the end.
MRAB writes:
If you believe you have something important to say, then at least say it clearly.
Indeed -- that commit log is an example of the kind of writing the reference to Strunk & White was intended to reduce; repetitive, jargon-filled, and mostly unnecessary to make the point.[1] Ironic, but not the only irony to be found in this commit.
Because I have seen the deterrent effect in action -- *it is real* -- I'd be sympathetic to this change if I hadn't directly experienced the value of a rule set like that in Strunk & White in teaching non-native speakers about writing English for technical purposes. Since I believe an admonition to "write clear and easily understandable English" is a deterrent too, especially for non-natives, I would prefer deleting the whole thing to this change, though.
The claim is that requiring Strunk & White deters PoC. I believe it. But by discarding all rules, this change "centers" English-speakers at the expense of the needs of large populations of *non-native-speaking* PoC. Many non-natives would benefit from adopting some of the advice in Strunk & White for *writing* clearly, and if others follow that advice, it would easier for them to *read*.[2] Don't take my word for it: Naoki Inada testifies to both issues in his post about "RFC English".[3]
It has also been claimed that many neuro-atypical folks find detailed rules comforting, as opposed to broad admonitions of that kind. Seems plausible, but I can't speak to it from personal experience or testimony of acquaintances. But if so, removing all reference to concrete rules for clear writing harms and deters them, too.
But "practice what you preach" is a fallacy, I guess. "Do what I say, not what I do" is the way of the world. Given human fallibility, maybe this is a not-bad thing, to focus on the merits of folks' speech rather than the demerits of their actions.... *shrug*
As I see it, in order of importance, we could say the following about comments in Python:
1. Comments should not say anything that a programmer with some experience can read directly from the code, taken out of the larger context. That eliminates a lot of problematic text right off the bat! :-)
2. Write comments in English. It is the lingua franca [sic!] of programming, for better or worse, and Python development is an international community of programmers. (The language may change, see "sic!" above. Boy, would I enjoy watching some folks struggle with Hindi or Chinese.)
3. Write in a comfortable dialect[4]. (Exceptions: legalese and The Academic Register are strictly forbidden, even if you're native in one of those. :-) I'd also add: Try to avoid regionalisms; aim for a broadly "international" form of the language. Some words and phrases might be specific to a certain region, or have different, possibly conflicting, meanings elsewhere. 4. Write clear and easily understandable comments, remembering that many potential readers are not native speakers, let alone native in "Standard" English.
5. For advice on writing clearly, Zinsser is a good textbook on writing to communicate. Strunk & White is a concise collection of concrete rules with examples of usage that help many to write more clearly, and its table of contents serves as a somewhat Petersian "Zen of Technical Writing". (There may be better alternatives to both for those purposes, but I don't know of any.) [snip]
On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 05:51:04PM +0100, MRAB wrote:
I'd also add: Try to avoid regionalisms; aim for a broadly "international" form of the language. Some
How do you spell "regionalism"? Martin PS: Irony intended
On 2020-07-04 21:07, Martin Dengler wrote:
On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 05:51:04PM +0100, MRAB wrote:
I'd also add: Try to avoid regionalisms; aim for a broadly "international" form of the language. Some
How do you spell "regionalism"?
Martin
PS: Irony intended
As far as I'm aware, there's only one way to spell it, but I'm sure someone can phrase it better.
On 5/07/20 8:30 am, MRAB wrote:
On 2020-07-04 21:07, Martin Dengler wrote:
How do you spell "regionalism"? As far as I'm aware, there's only one way to spell it,
I suppose there could be some planet where it's spelled "regionalizm". -- Greg
MRAB writes:
On 2020-07-04 16:23, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
3. Write in a comfortable dialect. (Exceptions: legalese and The Academic Register are strictly forbidden, even if you're native in one of those. :-)
I'd also add: Try to avoid regionalisms; aim for a broadly "international" form of the language. Some words and phrases might be specific to a certain region, or have different, possibly conflicting, meanings elsewhere.
I'm sympathetic, but I personally would give this its own number, probably 6. My reasoning starts from the fact that most Americans, at least, are not even aware that they have an accent! And few non- natives will any idea that there's no difference between "truck" in the mouth of an American and "lorry" in the mouth of most other English speakers (although that can be ameliorated by targeting the admonition specifically at native speakers). (I'm projecting from anecdotes, of course; I'm not sure how I'd acquire data on this.) I think deemphasizing this detail is on the side of caution. Following Strunk & White, or even choosing which of those rules to follow and which to ignore, is probably a lot easier for most people than identifying regionalisms. Or references to any subculture, such as my own "laying a burden of clarity and intelligibility we ourselves could not bear on non-native and non-Standard speakers" (compare any Christian Bible, Acts of the Apostles, 15:10). I did that because I thought it likely to be familiar to many of the more vociferous participants in the thread, but the sentence would have been much easier to parse if I'd avoided it. Thing is, I'm sure I've used Americanisms and even the dreaded Academic Register, but I sure never noticed them! :-) Steve
On 6/07/20 2:56 am, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Thing is, I'm sure I've used Americanisms and even the dreaded Academic Register, but I sure never noticed them! :-)
Or, in non-American, "surely never noticed them". :-) -- Greg
On 6/29/20 7:35 AM, Jim F.Hilliard wrote:
I believe I'm not the only one with this question but, how is Strunk & White connected with white supremacy?
Scanning through this thread, its wikipedia page and doing quick google search, I wasn't able to find something tangible.
Best Regards, * * Jim Fasarakis Hilliard
A somewhat flippant answer (hope I don't get in trouble for it) is because it defines the 'proper' use of English to be what some ancient 'White Guys' said it was as opposed to how some other 'Non-White' guys use it, and those 'White Guys' were, at least in part, the people the white supremacy came from, i.e., guilt by association. -- Richard Damon
The commit message is simply silly. It introduces numerous contentious and false claims that have nothing whatsoever to do with the small wording change. It misunderstands how language, culture, history, and indeed white supremacism, work. I would recommend amending the commit message. The underlying change itself is reasonable, and to my mind a small improvement. There was unnecessary specificity in using Strunk and White as reference, and not, say, William Zinsser's _On Writing Well_, which is almost as well known. In the concrete, it would be exceedingly rare for these to provide conflicting advice on a specific code comment. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 7:34 AM Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
On 6/29/20 6:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there.
I would say that say that I have seen the term "relic" being used as a 'weaponized' word to imply that the old thing WAS there intentionally as a repressive measure. I am not saying that this usage was intended to be used that way, but just as the old wording was taken as offensive to some due to implication, I can see that message as offensive to others due to implication, all because some people are easy to offend.
-- Richard Damon _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6EN5RNF5... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions.
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread. It opens the gap for people who are not concerned about development jump in the game shifting the focus away while nurturing a culture of thrash I mean you tend to ignore threads from python-dev and python-ideas which is not probably why you subscribed in the first place This is not the first time i am saying that you can fly around the world on official Python mailing lists. But it's regrettable that it's the first time i am seeing people telling that they should educate others and things like that. It can be based on the argument and circle around it but personal attacks are off limit If this was a Github issue, i don't think you list moderators would have dragged it around that much. Worst case scenario, someone would have been pinged and the issue taken care of. A PR or closing and you are done. I raised the issue of closing a mail thread before and the impractical nature of it was discussed but maybe warnings and continued posting after the warning results in ban can be enforced And it's annoying that it got dragged to two mailing lists. I respect Python people and i am always eager to follow some C code discussions, deprecating this C API etc. It's a new world for me. Maybe active list members should sign a convention or a vetting process can be setup before we can discuss it on the lists. Not ideal but might be useful. Kind Regards, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer compileralchemy <https://compileralchemy.github.io/> | blog <https://abdur-rahmaanj.github.io/> github <https://github.com/Abdur-RahmaanJ> Mauritius On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 8:11 PM David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
The commit message is simply silly. It introduces numerous contentious and false claims that have nothing whatsoever to do with the small wording change. It misunderstands how language, culture, history, and indeed white supremacism, work.
I would recommend amending the commit message.
The underlying change itself is reasonable, and to my mind a small improvement. There was unnecessary specificity in using Strunk and White as reference, and not, say, William Zinsser's _On Writing Well_, which is almost as well known. In the concrete, it would be exceedingly rare for these to provide conflicting advice on a specific code comment.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 7:34 AM Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
On 6/29/20 6:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there.
I would say that say that I have seen the term "relic" being used as a 'weaponized' word to imply that the old thing WAS there intentionally as a repressive measure. I am not saying that this usage was intended to be used that way, but just as the old wording was taken as offensive to some due to implication, I can see that message as offensive to others due to implication, all because some people are easy to offend.
-- Richard Damon _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6EN5RNF5... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/AMH7WMUO... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Hi all, as a moderator of python-ideas, I’ve asked postmaster to place python-ideas into emergency moderation. (I do not have the tools to do so myself.) I’m willing to review messages individually as needed. best, —titus
On Jun 29, 2020, at 9:24 AM, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer <arj.python@gmail.com> wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
It opens the gap for people who are not concerned about development jump in the game shifting the focus away while nurturing a culture of thrash I mean you tend to ignore threads from python-dev and python-ideas which is not probably why you subscribed in the first place
This is not the first time i am saying that you can fly around the world on official Python mailing lists. But it's regrettable that it's the first time i am seeing people telling that they should educate others and things like that. It can be based on the argument and circle around it but personal attacks are off limit
If this was a Github issue, i don't think you list moderators would have dragged it around that much. Worst case scenario, someone would have been pinged and the issue taken care of. A PR or closing and you are done.
I raised the issue of closing a mail thread before and the impractical nature of it was discussed but maybe warnings and continued posting after the warning results in ban can be enforced
And it's annoying that it got dragged to two mailing lists. I respect Python people and i am always eager to follow some C code discussions, deprecating this C API etc. It's a new world for me.
Maybe active list members should sign a convention or a vetting process can be setup before we can discuss it on the lists. Not ideal but might be useful.
Kind Regards,
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer compileralchemy | blog github Mauritius
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 8:11 PM David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote: The commit message is simply silly. It introduces numerous contentious and false claims that have nothing whatsoever to do with the small wording change. It misunderstands how language, culture, history, and indeed white supremacism, work.
I would recommend amending the commit message.
The underlying change itself is reasonable, and to my mind a small improvement. There was unnecessary specificity in using Strunk and White as reference, and not, say, William Zinsser's _On Writing Well_, which is almost as well known. In the concrete, it would be exceedingly rare for these to provide conflicting advice on a specific code comment.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 7:34 AM Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote: On 6/29/20 6:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
and describes the old text as a "relic", which is another way of saying that the problems were only there by historical accident, rather than by anyone intentionally keeping it there.
I would say that say that I have seen the term "relic" being used as a 'weaponized' word to imply that the old thing WAS there intentionally as a repressive measure. I am not saying that this usage was intended to be used that way, but just as the old wording was taken as offensive to some due to implication, I can see that message as offensive to others due to implication, all because some people are easy to offend.
-- Richard Damon _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6EN5RNF5... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/AMH7WMUO... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/B426T6LT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!) The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
Can we simply revise the commit message to something neutral like "Removed specific reference to Strunk and White in favor of generic urge for language clarity." That's all the change actually was; there's no need for the other debate or broad political background. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!)
The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book.
-- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HP2NJGIT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions.
This is not about the commit message. It’s way more than that. It's been going on non-stop and got increasingly worse since at least the preparation of the Python elections ~2 years ago. It is not normal what is going on here. People are scared. And it is pretty much guaranteed that this is not gonna be the last occurrence of it. On the horizon we have other language-related controversies like "whitelist" / "blacklist", renaming "master" to "main" in GIT, and who knows what else (maybe "whitespace"? or @property?). And every time that's gonna happen the motivation is gonna be about white supremacy/privilege/guilt etc. Because it's always about that, and we'll be having this discussion once again. On one hand Python gladly takes our patches and everything is smooth, on the other hand it wants us to not only accept "this" and be quiet, but also to take a stand and be an ally in the battle against the vocabulary "or else". So what's the point of contributing if the emotional distress and the risk that comes with it are so high? In the previous discussion preceding this one where one PSF member left because it all got so political, somebody posted anonymously (and gently) for fear of repercussions. The same fear has been expressed in this thread. In the other thread it has even been suggested that "being silent re. <the cause>" == "being complicit". I mean, are you serious? I explicitly avoided to comment on that because I didn't even know where to begin to explain how profoundly wrong that is on so many different levels. How irrespectful it is to ask people who just want to contribute some code here to take precise political sides or be damned if they don't. How unfair it is to do that especially towards old-time contributors. And now I even have to hope some moderator will be reasonable enough not to mark my emails as "white suprematism" (LOL) and send them through. This is just ridiculous. I've never been pro-CoC, but even if I were, this is what the enforcement part of the CoC dictates:
https://www.python.org/psf/conduct/enforcement/ Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response.
...so even the CoC won't help. So this is why this problem is more profound than a simple commit message. It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion. On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 22:28, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Can we simply revise the commit message to something neutral like "Removed specific reference to Strunk and White in favor of generic urge for language clarity."
That's all the change actually was; there's no need for the other debate or broad political background.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!)
The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book.
-- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HP2NJGIT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/JOPTN4NM... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:28 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
This is not about the commit message. It’s way more than that. It's been going on non-stop and got increasingly worse since at least the preparation of the Python elections ~2 years ago. It is not normal what is going on here. People are scared. And it is pretty much guaranteed that this is not gonna be the last occurrence of it. On the horizon we have other language-related controversies like "whitelist" / "blacklist", renaming "master" to "main" in GIT, and who knows what else (maybe "whitespace"? or @property?).
I don't have words for the irony of complaining about changing words while objecting to the wording in a commit message. Especially considering the commit message isn't nearly as visible as the places that people have actually been fixing things like master/slave.
And every time that's gonna happen the motivation is gonna be about white supremacy/privilege/guilt etc. Because it's always about that, and we'll be having this discussion once again. On one hand Python gladly takes our patches and everything is smooth,
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches. No contribution to Python outweighs the harm you're doing by espousing and advocating for these views. This kind of sentiment scares away a lot of valuable contributors -- I know this because *they have told me* -- and that you're doing it while arguing against a change to a different (unintentional but still harmful) gatekeeping mechanism just makes it so much worse.
on the other hand it wants us to not only accept "this" and be quiet, but also to take a stand and be an ally in the battle against the vocabulary "or else". So what's the point of contributing if the emotional distress and the risk that comes with it are so high?
This is exactly why we want you to stop, yes. You're causing a lot of emotional distress in people, and putting people at risk. You're even causing it in people *in your purported demographic*, like me, let alone the people you're trying to disadvantage. Stop it.
In the previous discussion preceding this one where one PSF member left because it all got so political, somebody posted anonymously (and gently) for fear of repercussions. The same fear has been expressed in this thread. In the other thread it has even been suggested that "being silent re. <the cause>" == "being complicit". I mean, are you serious? I explicitly avoided to comment on that because I didn't even know where to begin to explain how profoundly wrong that is on so many different levels. How irrespectful it is to ask people who just want to contribute some code here to take precise political sides or be damned if they don't. How unfair it is to do that especially towards old-time contributors. And now I even have to hope some moderator will be reasonable enough not to mark my emails as "white suprematism" (LOL) and send them through. This is just ridiculous. I've never been pro-CoC, but even if I were, this is what the enforcement part of the CoC dictates:
https://www.python.org/psf/conduct/enforcement/ Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response.
...so even the CoC won't help. So this is why this problem is more profound than a simple commit message. It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion.
I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true. Your complaints of "racism against whites" here haven't gone unheard, unfortunately. They reflect very badly on you. They are incredibly harmful to many python-dev members and the Python community as a whole, and they reflect very badly on all of us. The option you should take is to learn how wrong you are in this. There are very, very many resources online explaining why reverse racism isn't a thing, *even if* someone was racist against you for being white (rather than judging you on your words or actions, as I'm doing here). Nobody here is being racist against (cis, het, etc) white males, even though we want to be *less* racist (and sexist, ablist, etc.) against others. We want to be more welcoming, not less -- but not to people who make the community less welcoming. If you can't accept this, please leave the community.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 22:28, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Can we simply revise the commit message to something neutral like "Removed specific reference to Strunk and White in favor of generic urge for language clarity."
That's all the change actually was; there's no need for the other debate or broad political background.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!)
The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book.
-- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HP2NJGIT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/JOPTN4NM... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/WSU2WV2V... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me spread!
On 30/06/2020 10:52, Thomas Wouters wrote:
I don't have words for the irony of complaining about changing words while objecting to the wording in a commit message. Especially considering the commit message isn't nearly as visible as the places that people have actually been fixing things like master/slave.
I'm sorry, I was a little deafened by the irony that it's only wrong to complain about changes you agree with. The commit was over-hasty, but that's not a crime. It improves matters for those who find the idea of writing formal English daunting, but at the expense of those who find the idea of filling a blank box with words terrifying. A little more thought could have catered for both, but it's not the end of the world. With a sufficient supply of round tuits I can always submit a PR myself. The commit message is a political message that flatly does not belong in the repository. Do you see the difference? I really wish you hadn't brought up the master/slave debacle again. I may feel obliged to submit PRs to restore the accepted usage because, and I can't believe I have to keep saying this, *creating taboos only ever makes things worse.* -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:52:52 +0200 Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches.
Really? You know, I don't care (and few people probably care) what you think personally of other core developers. But that you aren't even able to keep those thoughts for yourself and instead think it's ok to launch vitriolic attacks publicly, doesn't reflect very well on you. Personally, I'm glad Giampaolo contributes to the project, as well as to the community (psutil is invaluable). And I think you should just police yourself instead of attacking him personally.
We want to be more welcoming, not less --
But do you *personally*? You certainly do not sound like you want to be "more welcoming". Your belliquous attitude doesn't support that. You sound like you have an axe to grind. If your stated intentions are contradicted by your own behaviour, you're doing it wrong.
It needs to be pointed out that Thomas Wouters was recently re-elected to the PSF board. I think we need to know whether Thomas speaks for the entire PSF board.Giampaolo feared this: "It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion." and Thomas replied: "I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true." So is it true? Do the core devs and the PSF have a policy of pushing divisive political changes to silence and force out of the community people who are guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion on political matters? I think that Thomas' post violated the CoC: * not open, considerate, or respectful; * dismissive of Giampaolo's efforts; * not respectful of differing viewpoints; * lacking empathy towards others with alternative perspectives. The CoC doesn't mention the word "tolerant" or "tolerance", but there was nothing of either in Thomas' post. And coming from a PSF Board member, I think that is extremely worrying. Steven On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:42:40PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:52:52 +0200 Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches.
Really?
You know, I don't care (and few people probably care) what you think personally of other core developers. But that you aren't even able to keep those thoughts for yourself and instead think it's ok to launch vitriolic attacks publicly, doesn't reflect very well on you.
Personally, I'm glad Giampaolo contributes to the project, as well as to the community (psutil is invaluable). And I think you should just police yourself instead of attacking him personally.
We want to be more welcoming, not less --
But do you *personally*? You certainly do not sound like you want to be "more welcoming". Your belliquous attitude doesn't support that. You sound like you have an axe to grind.
If your stated intentions are contradicted by your own behaviour, you're doing it wrong.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/BRVIF7HD... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:36 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
It needs to be pointed out that Thomas Wouters was recently re-elected to the PSF board. I think we need to know whether Thomas speaks for the entire PSF board.Giampaolo feared this:
"It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion."
and Thomas replied:
"I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true."
So is it true? Do the core devs and the PSF have a policy of pushing divisive political changes to silence and force out of the community people who are guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion on political matters?
I wasn't speaking for the PSF or the Steering Council, nor was my intent to "silence or force out people guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion".
I think that Thomas' post violated the CoC:
Please report all CoC violations to the CoC WG.
* not open, considerate, or respectful;
* dismissive of Giampaolo's efforts;
* not respectful of differing viewpoints;
* lacking empathy towards others with alternative perspectives.
The CoC doesn't mention the word "tolerant" or "tolerance", but there was nothing of either in Thomas' post. And coming from a PSF Board member, I think that is extremely worrying.
Steven
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:42:40PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:52:52 +0200 Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches.
Really?
You know, I don't care (and few people probably care) what you think personally of other core developers. But that you aren't even able to keep those thoughts for yourself and instead think it's ok to launch vitriolic attacks publicly, doesn't reflect very well on you.
Personally, I'm glad Giampaolo contributes to the project, as well as to the community (psutil is invaluable). And I think you should just police yourself instead of attacking him personally.
We want to be more welcoming, not less --
But do you *personally*? You certainly do not sound like you want to be "more welcoming". Your belliquous attitude doesn't support that. You sound like you have an axe to grind.
If your stated intentions are contradicted by your own behaviour, you're doing it wrong.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/BRVIF7HD... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/4HKNJ65Y... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me spread!
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:16 PM Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:36 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
It needs to be pointed out that Thomas Wouters was recently re-elected to the PSF board. I think we need to know whether Thomas speaks for the entire PSF board.Giampaolo feared this:
"It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion."
and Thomas replied:
"I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true."
So is it true? Do the core devs and the PSF have a policy of pushing divisive political changes to silence and force out of the community people who are guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion on political matters?
I wasn't speaking for the PSF or the Steering Council, nor was my intent to "silence or force out people guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion".
I think that Thomas' post violated the CoC:
Please report all CoC violations to the CoC WG.
Please don't. As far as I'm concerned, me and Thomas are fine. Also, as I said, I don't like CoCs nor appealing to them. -- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev
On 06/30/2020 07:07 AM, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:16 PM Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
Please report all CoC violations to the CoC WG.
Please don't. As far as I'm concerned, me and Thomas are fine. Also, as I said, I don't like CoCs nor appealing to them.
This is a public list, and more people than just you and Thomas are involved. -- ~Ethan~
On 30/06/2020 13:58, Thomas Wouters wrote:
I wasn't speaking for the PSF or the Steering Council,
I'm afraid as politicians around the world discover on a daily basis, it doesn't work that way. Particularly on political matters such as this, you do speak as a Steering Council member and PSF board member unless you very explicitly say otherwise, and even then your comments will reflect on both organisations. This is the sort of behaviour that gets local politicians suspended from their parties.
nor was my intent to "silence or force out people guilty of thought-crime and holding the wrong opinion".
Perhaps you should re-read what you wrote. "Unfriendly" is an extremely polite term for the tone of it, and I for one felt threatened. [Steven D'Aprano said:]
I think that Thomas' post violated the CoC:
Please report all CoC violations to the CoC WG.
Good point. Duly done. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:39 AM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
It needs to be pointed out that Thomas Wouters was recently re-elected to the PSF board. I think we need to know whether Thomas speaks for the entire PSF board.
That seems silly. Of course Thomas doesn't speak for the Board here, and nothing suggests he does. That doesn't mean the rest of the board disagrees, but neither does it mean they agree. They can speak for themselves. In the very unlikely event that the PSF Board takes an official action in relation to this stuff, it would be very clearly marked as such. Directors are just people, y'know.
On 6/30/2020 5:52 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:28 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com <mailto:g.rodola@gmail.com>> wrote:
This is not about the commit message. It’s way more than that. It's been going on non-stop and got increasingly worse since at least the preparation of the Python elections ~2 years ago. It is not normal what is going on here. People are scared. And it is pretty much guaranteed that this is not gonna be the last occurrence of it. On the horizon we have other language-related controversies like "whitelist" / "blacklist", renaming "master" to "main" in GIT, and who knows what else (maybe "whitespace"? or @property?).
I don't have words for the irony of complaining about changing words while objecting to the wording in a commit message. Especially considering the commit message isn't nearly as visible as the places that people have actually been fixing things like master/slave.
And every time that's gonna happen the motivation is gonna be about white supremacy/privilege/guilt etc. Because it's always about that, and we'll be having this discussion once again. On one hand Python gladly takes our patches and everything is smooth,
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches. No contribution to Python outweighs the harm you're doing by espousing and advocating for these views. This kind of sentiment scares away a lot of valuable contributors -- I know this because *they have told me* -- and that you're doing it while arguing against a change to a different (unintentional but still harmful) gatekeeping mechanism just makes it so much worse.
Note to self: It's kind of hard to convince the opposition to take an honest look at my viewpoint when I start by attacking them personally. To everyone else: I saw this flame war coming the minute I read the original post. Unfortunately, it seems no longer possible to discuss this subject in any reasonable way. Everyone seems to have forgotten that you can attack an idea without attacking the person presenting it. Moderators, please, can this thread just be stopped? --Edwin
I tend to keep out of these types of discussions because they have a tendency to be rather polarizing, and when introduced in an unrelated environment (such as python-ideas or python-dev), tend to do nothing other than set people against each other. But, after the above message, I feel obligated to respond. Also, keep in mind that I'm stating this as someone who fully agreed with the change made (as mentioned earlier in the thread). Thomas Wouters wrote:
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches
Regardless of thoughts on the above matter, this is absolutely uncalled for Thomas, especially coming from someone who has served on the PSF board and was elected for the upcoming term. As someone who voted for you in the recent election thinking you would represent the core development team well, the above statement does make me question that to some degree. I hope this situation is an outlier, and not indicative of how problems will be addressed in the future. I for one greatly appreciate the contributions by Giampaolo. Our CI would be nowhere near where it is today without his help, not to mention the countless refleaks, bug fixes, and expertise provided on a vast number of issues. I could go on, but quite frankly it's not especially relevant, because I'd say the same for any other member of the core team or active contributor. I really can't imagine in any way how this statement isn't a clear violation of the CoC (https://www.python.org/psf/conduct/).
*Acknowledging time and effort*. We're respectful of the volunteer efforts that permeate the Python community. We're thoughtful when addressing the efforts of others, keeping in mind that often times the labor was completed simply for the good of the community.
The statement completely disregards the time and effort put into Giampaolo's contributions to Python.
Showing empathy towards other community members. We're attentive in our communications, whether in person or online, and *we're tactful when approaching differing views*.
*Being respectful.* We're respectful of others, their positions, their skills, their commitments, and their efforts.
I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been
The statement is clearly not tactful or respectful of his differing viewpoint. that this is true. Your complaints of "racism against whites" here haven't gone unheard, unfortunately. They reflect very badly on you. They are incredibly harmful to many python-dev members and the Python community as a whole, and they reflect very badly on all of us. I can see how the "racism against whites" argument could come across as being non-inclusive towards others, particularly because these arguments are often put forth by white supremacists for ill-intended purposes. However, telling someone who has devoted countless hours towards contributing to Python that "I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches" is pretty much the exact opposite of a tactful way to approach this issue. Even assuming that Giampolo's views are in violation of the CoC (which I'm not saying they are or aren't), the way to handle it is most certainly not also by violating the CoC against him. If those views reflect badly on us, I think it reflects even worse on us that we have to resort to telling people that their contributions are not valued because they have a different point of view, even if that view is offensive to others. Are we not capable of having this discussion in a civil manner? I realize that this is a topic that is dear to many people (including myself, as someone who is politically progressive), but that does not make this sort of exchange acceptable. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 5:59 AM Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:28 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
This is not about the commit message. It’s way more than that. It's been going on non-stop and got increasingly worse since at least the preparation of the Python elections ~2 years ago. It is not normal what is going on here. People are scared. And it is pretty much guaranteed that this is not gonna be the last occurrence of it. On the horizon we have other language-related controversies like "whitelist" / "blacklist", renaming "master" to "main" in GIT, and who knows what else (maybe "whitespace"? or @property?).
I don't have words for the irony of complaining about changing words while objecting to the wording in a commit message. Especially considering the commit message isn't nearly as visible as the places that people have actually been fixing things like master/slave.
And every time that's gonna happen the motivation is gonna be about white supremacy/privilege/guilt etc. Because it's always about that, and we'll be having this discussion once again. On one hand Python gladly takes our patches and everything is smooth,
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches. No contribution to Python outweighs the harm you're doing by espousing and advocating for these views. This kind of sentiment scares away a lot of valuable contributors -- I know this because *they have told me* -- and that you're doing it while arguing against a change to a different (unintentional but still harmful) gatekeeping mechanism just makes it so much worse.
on the other hand it wants us to not only accept "this" and be quiet, but also to take a stand and be an ally in the battle against the vocabulary "or else". So what's the point of contributing if the emotional distress and the risk that comes with it are so high?
This is exactly why we want you to stop, yes. You're causing a lot of emotional distress in people, and putting people at risk. You're even causing it in people *in your purported demographic*, like me, let alone the people you're trying to disadvantage. Stop it.
In the previous discussion preceding this one where one PSF member left because it all got so political, somebody posted anonymously (and gently) for fear of repercussions. The same fear has been expressed in this thread. In the other thread it has even been suggested that "being silent re. <the cause>" == "being complicit". I mean, are you serious? I explicitly avoided to comment on that because I didn't even know where to begin to explain how profoundly wrong that is on so many different levels. How irrespectful it is to ask people who just want to contribute some code here to take precise political sides or be damned if they don't. How unfair it is to do that especially towards old-time contributors. And now I even have to hope some moderator will be reasonable enough not to mark my emails as "white suprematism" (LOL) and send them through. This is just ridiculous. I've never been pro-CoC, but even if I were, this is what the enforcement part of the CoC dictates:
https://www.python.org/psf/conduct/enforcement/ Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response.
...so even the CoC won't help. So this is why this problem is more profound than a simple commit message. It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion.
I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true. Your complaints of "racism against whites" here haven't gone unheard, unfortunately. They reflect very badly on you. They are incredibly harmful to many python-dev members and the Python community as a whole, and they reflect very badly on all of us. The option you should take is to learn how wrong you are in this. There are very, very many resources online explaining why reverse racism isn't a thing, *even if* someone was racist against you for being white (rather than judging you on your words or actions, as I'm doing here). Nobody here is being racist against (cis, het, etc) white males, even though we want to be *less* racist (and sexist, ablist, etc.) against others. We want to be more welcoming, not less -- but not to people who make the community less welcoming. If you can't accept this, please leave the community.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 22:28, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Can we simply revise the commit message to something neutral like "Removed specific reference to Strunk and White in favor of generic urge for language clarity."
That's all the change actually was; there's no need for the other debate or broad political background.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!)
The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book.
-- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HP2NJGIT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/JOPTN4NM... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/WSU2WV2V... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org>
Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me spread! _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/W2MCQIXB... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:53 AM Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:28 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
This is not about the commit message. It’s way more than that. It's been going on non-stop and got increasingly worse since at least the preparation of the Python elections ~2 years ago. It is not normal what is going on here. People are scared. And it is pretty much guaranteed that this is not gonna be the last occurrence of it. On the horizon we have other language-related controversies like "whitelist" / "blacklist", renaming "master" to "main" in GIT, and who knows what else (maybe "whitespace"? or @property?).
I don't have words for the irony of complaining about changing words while objecting to the wording in a commit message.
They are two different things. One thing is changing some words to make a concept more clear. I said I agree with it. Another thing is using that as an excuse to deliver a political message. That I don't agree with. I'm tired of it. I'm literally overwhelmed by it. I open Twitter and I see politics. I open Facebook and I see politics. That's fine. But why should I see politics also here? I don't know.
And every time that's gonna happen the motivation is gonna be about white supremacy/privilege/guilt etc. Because it's always about that, and we'll be having this discussion once again. On one hand Python gladly takes our patches and everything is smooth,
I'm not sure who 'our' is in this sentence, but I'm certainly not glad Python ever took any of your patches. No contribution to Python outweighs the harm you're doing by espousing and advocating for these views. This kind of sentiment scares away a lot of valuable contributors -- I know this because *they have told me* --
I can say exactly the same thing. There are different people in this thread and other threads who publicly said they are uncomfortable with this situation. They don't espouse or advocate for any view in particular. And me neither, because complaining about X doesn't necessarily mean wanting to push for Y. I don't want to push for X nor Y. And I don't want to be put in a situation where I am forced to advocate for X or Y, or be vilified if I don't agree with X as it happens here. It's just not the right place because it's too close to the personal sphere (work, etc.). Some texted me privately exactly as they did with you, because they are afraid of repercussions in that regard (work). Others posted anonymously for the same reason. Does that seem normal, sane or "welcoming" to you? Do you think it's helping anybody anywhere? It is not. It is not me who's doing this *in the least*. I'm merely calling it out.
on the other hand it wants us to not only accept "this" and be quiet, but also to take a stand and be an ally in the battle against the vocabulary "or else". So what's the point of contributing if the emotional distress and the risk that comes with it are so high?
This is exactly why we want you to stop, yes. You're causing a lot of emotional distress in people, and putting people at risk. You're even causing it in people *in your purported demographic*, like me, let alone the people you're trying to disadvantage. Stop it.
I'm not putting anybody at risk except myself.
In the previous discussion preceding this one where one PSF member left because it all got so political, somebody posted anonymously (and gently) for fear of repercussions. The same fear has been expressed in this thread. In the other thread it has even been suggested that "being silent re. <the cause>" == "being complicit". I mean, are you serious? I explicitly avoided to comment on that because I didn't even know where to begin to explain how profoundly wrong that is on so many different levels. How irrespectful it is to ask people who just want to contribute some code here to take precise political sides or be damned if they don't. How unfair it is to do that especially towards old-time contributors. And now I even have to hope some moderator will be reasonable enough not to mark my emails as "white suprematism" (LOL) and send them through. This is just ridiculous. I've never been pro-CoC, but even if I were, this is what the enforcement part of the CoC dictates:
https://www.python.org/psf/conduct/enforcement/ Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response.
...so even the CoC won't help. So this is why this problem is more profound than a simple commit message. It's gonna happen again and again, until everybody gets in line, shuts up or leaves due to exhaustion.
I'm not sure how much more clear python-dev and the PSF could have been that this is true. Your complaints of "racism against whites" here haven't gone unheard, unfortunately. They reflect very badly on you. They are incredibly harmful to many python-dev members and the Python community as a whole, and they reflect very badly on all of us. The option you should take is to learn how wrong you are in this. There are very, very many resources online explaining why reverse racism isn't a thing, *even if* someone was racist against you for being white (rather than judging you on your words or actions, as I'm doing here). Nobody here is being racist against (cis, het, etc) white males, even though we want to be *less* racist (and sexist, ablist, etc.) against others. We want to be more welcoming, not less -- but not to people who make the community less welcoming. If you can't accept this, please leave the community.
That's pretty far reaching and personal. I will skip on this one.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 22:28, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Can we simply revise the commit message to something neutral like "Removed specific reference to Strunk and White in favor of generic urge for language clarity."
That's all the change actually was; there's no need for the other debate or broad political background.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary. When such statements are made, it is generally a good idea to be reasonably sure that the community one is representing is broadly OK with that statement. (I speak in vague terms because you will never get 100% agreement from anyone on anything!)
The commit message that sparked this all was, quite unnecessarily, a political statement. The threads have demonstrated that it is not even vaguely universally accepted, so it being in the PEPs repository (not just a PR, it's there, public, and effectively representing you and me) is a problem. That it's still there now is pretty unacceptable in my book.
-- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/HP2NJGIT... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/JOPTN4NM... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/WSU2WV2V... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org>
Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me spread!
-- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev
Kind Regards, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer compileralchemy <https://compileralchemy.github.io/> | blog <https://abdur-rahmaanj.github.io/> github <https://github.com/Abdur-RahmaanJ> Mauritius On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:34 PM Rhodri James <rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/06/2020 17:24, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote:
Threads like these are meaningless, does not provide any learning value and is nowhere near the single vs double quote thread.
I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Since the PSF has seen fit to make a political statement (re Black Lives Matter, and I don't particularly disagree with either the statement or the choice of making it), threads like these are both inevitable and necessary.
Good and nice but not on python-dev. The PSF is already taking appropriate steps on Twitter and relevant mediums. And in case of correction of individuals i feel it better be left in the hands of moderators. I prefer to maintain the purity of threads rather than seeing members leave or stay aloof after a bitter experience.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:34 PM Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
The commit message used, however, reveals implementation details of the change which are irrelevant to the stated aim, which is making the documentation clear and concise. Use of such language is certainly regrettable, since it carries with it the implication that the Python developer community has somehow been wilfully sanctioning "relics of white supremacy" up until the change was made.
There certainly is a place in tech for politics, as I have argued many times, and I am sure nobody wishes to continue to use language that might be offensive to readers. But I would suggest that the politics can safely be omitted from commit messages, since they can only properly be fully addressed in the conversation about the PR in advance. The wording of the commit message has the appearance (probably specious) of wanting to rub
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:31 AM Steve Holden <steve@holdenweb.com> wrote: former misdeeds in the face of a largely innocent community, and that is the principal reason I found it distasteful and unnecessary.
I just re-read the commit message, and I think you're being oversensitive and imagining things that aren't there. The actual commit message is written in a straightforward and factual way, and spends special effort on *absolving* the community of this kind of guilt.
"The community" has nothing to be absolved of, "Strunk & White" has nothing to do with white supremacy and there is no guilt. If you feel guilty because you're white then that's your problem. I don't feel guilty for being white, the same way a black person should not feel guilty for being black. And I have literally ZERO excuses to make to you or anybody else in here because I'm white. Assuming guilt based on the color of your skin and constantly attacking that specific group because of that is racist. It's that simple. I find it astonishing how some people here don't seem to realize that (or pretend not to). And what's the goal anyway? Make us all feel guilty, create yet another heated discussion, widen divisions, wait for the occasional folks who dare to speak up against this vitriol and kick them out? And then what? What is the plan here exactly? Don't you folks realize this is a technical forum? Don't you understand how inappropriate it is to constantly bring up these kinds of messages up here, and force people to either witness them silently for fear of repercussions, or to engage in the discussion and risk paying the consequences in terms of work / hiring / career / status / reputation etc.? Because that's what happens, and we all know it. This is a very public forum and we can all be traced back to here. There are professionals here, people who go to conferences and/or make a living out of Python, who pay the rent and support their family with it, and that don't want to be put in this position. It does not scale. It will never scale. Because whether we like it or not we have to coexist together in this virtual space, including with people we don't like. And this is why it is such a good idea to leave politics out of the door and only stay focused on Python. We will still have different opinions and occasional clashes, but as long as they are technical they will be genuine, prolific and everything will be fine as it was before "this" started (I've been reading this list for 12 years now). Discussing politics, on the other hand, will only keep bringing conflict over and over again. There's tons of proof of this already, and I can't envision a different outcome in the long run. Because most of us are not OK with being put against a wall and being blamed for "supremacy", "guilt", "privilege" or whatever term you have in your jargon. I certainly am not. Furthermore, that jargon makes no sense outside of the US and it's just ridiculous. I'm European, am split between living here and in Asia, and I can guarantee you that much. Please, stop this. - Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:51 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:34 PM Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
The commit message used, however, reveals implementation details of the change which are irrelevant to the stated aim, which is making the documentation clear and concise. Use of such language is certainly regrettable, since it carries with it the implication that the Python developer community has somehow been wilfully sanctioning "relics of white supremacy" up until the change was made.
There certainly is a place in tech for politics, as I have argued many times, and I am sure nobody wishes to continue to use language that might be offensive to readers. But I would suggest that the politics can safely be omitted from commit messages, since they can only properly be fully addressed in the conversation about the PR in advance. The wording of the commit message has the appearance (probably specious) of wanting to rub
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:31 AM Steve Holden <steve@holdenweb.com> wrote: former misdeeds in the face of a largely innocent community, and that is the principal reason I found it distasteful and unnecessary.
I just re-read the commit message, and I think you're being oversensitive and imagining things that aren't there. The actual commit message is written in a straightforward and factual way, and spends special effort on *absolving* the community of this kind of guilt.
"The community" has nothing to be absolved of, "Strunk & White" has nothing to do with white supremacy and there is no guilt. If you feel guilty because you're white then that's your problem. I don't feel guilty for being white, the same way a black person should not feel guilty for being black. And I have literally ZERO excuses to make to you or anybody else in here because I'm white. Assuming guilt based on the color of your skin and constantly attacking that specific group because of that is racist. It's that simple. I find it astonishing how some people here don't seem to realize that (or pretend not to).
And what's the goal anyway? Make us all feel guilty, create yet another heated discussion, widen divisions, wait for the occasional folks who dare to speak up against this vitriol and kick them out? And then what? What is the plan here exactly? Don't you folks realize this is a technical forum? Don't you understand how inappropriate it is to constantly bring up these kinds of messages up here, and force people to either witness them silently for fear of repercussions, or to engage in the discussion and risk paying the consequences in terms of work / hiring / career / status / reputation etc.? Because that's what happens, and we all know it. This is a very public forum and we can all be traced back to here. There are professionals here, people who go to conferences and/or make a living out of Python, who pay the rent and support their family with it, and that don't want to be put in this position.
It does not scale. It will never scale. Because whether we like it or not we have to coexist together in this virtual space, including with people we don't like. And this is why it is such a good idea to leave politics out of the door and only stay focused on Python. We will still have different opinions and occasional clashes, but as long as they are technical they will be genuine, prolific and everything will be fine as it was before "this" started (I've been reading this list for 12 years now). Discussing politics, on the other hand, will only keep bringing conflict over and over again. There's tons of proof of this already, and I can't envision a different outcome in the long run. Because most of us are not OK with being put against a wall and being blamed for "supremacy", "guilt", "privilege" or whatever term you have in your jargon. I certainly am not. Furthermore, that jargon makes no sense outside of the US and it's just ridiculous. I'm European, am split between living here and in Asia, and I can guarantee you that much.
Please, stop this.
- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
The above response is how I feel about this. There is palpable fear right now that anyone who disagrees that these political types of discussion have a place in the professional world will be ostracized. I fear it even writing this short email. And that fear is more than warranted. The laudable goals of inclusion in the python community, which I support, are not being served by bringing these politically motivated changes-- a perfect example of which is this latest claim that S&W, an utterly inoffensive English language standard that itself has nothing to do with white supremacy, is a "relic of white supremacy" that has been place for two (or nearly two) decades in the core python founding PEPs, etc., and the absurd claim that it is hurtful in some way to non-white people, and these sorts of claims not only going unchallenged but even in some ways encouraged at the top of the leadership-- to the fore. It is divisive, and it makes me want to not want to be a part of the community because of 1. fear that I will pay dearly if I speak up (happily I'm not a developer although I've thought about a career change, but probably I can kiss that goodbye after this email) and 2. it is extremely unpleasant to have no realm of life-- not technical/professional, not sports, not even church-- in which the American politics that permeate all of life these days (and seems to be reaching its tendrils across the water into other countries) can be put to the side. I'm tired. Please, please think about how we can make the focus of this community be technical considerations. Rick.
Adding my voice to those that ask for such discussions be stopped ... and, if at all possible, be snipped in the bud and prevented from occurring in the future. More below. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:51 PM Ricky Teachey <ricky@teachey.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:51 AM Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
And what's the goal anyway? Make us all feel guilty, create yet another heated discussion, widen divisions, wait for the occasional folks who dare to speak up against this vitriol and kick them out? And then what? What is the plan here exactly? Don't you folks realize this is a technical forum?
...
Please, stop this.
- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
The above response is how I feel about this. There is palpable fear right now that anyone who disagrees that these political types of discussion have a place in the professional world will be ostracized. I fear it even writing this short email. And that fear is more than warranted.
The laudable goals of inclusion in the python community, which I support, are not being served by bringing these politically motivated changes-- a perfect example of which is this latest claim that S&W, an utterly inoffensive English language standard that itself has nothing to do with white supremacy, is a "relic of white supremacy" that has been place for two (or nearly two) decades in the core python founding PEPs, etc., and the absurd claim that it is hurtful in some way to non-white people, and these sorts of claims not only going unchallenged but even in some ways encouraged at the top of the leadership-- to the fore. It is divisive, and it makes me want to not want to be a part of the community because of 1. fear that I will pay dearly if I speak up (happily I'm not a developer although I've thought about a career change, but probably I can kiss that goodbye after this email) and 2. it is extremely unpleasant to have no realm of life-- not technical/professional, not sports, not even church-- in which the American politics that permeate all of life these days (and seems to be reaching its tendrils across the water into other countries) can be put to the side.
I'm tired. Please, please think about how we can make the focus of this community be technical considerations.
One of my proudest/happiest moments as a general Python contributor was when I was nominated as a PSF Fellow in 2010. In 2013, frustrated at similar social/political discussions taking over some Python forum, and not having the mental fortitude to speak up, I quietly asked for my status to be converted to Emeritus ( https://www.python.org/psf/members/#emeritus-fellows) and withdrew for a few years. This time, rather than be completely silent, I feel like I must speak (for myself, and possibly for others) and ask to please stop these non-technical digressions which only bring divisions. André Roberge
Rick.
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/7AGI7S... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
To bring this thread back to encouraging diversity, I must point out that diverse English dialects are not all there is to diversity, folks. Nathaniel Smith writes:
In particular, it emphasizes that the new text is accomplishing "the same goal", "maintaining the original intent",
That displays a great misunderstanding of that goal and intent in my opinion. The original intent clearly includes providing *concrete* guidelines, because no student of Strunk & White would use a reference to Strunk & White if the phrase "clear and easily understood" would do. Strunk & White is not a grammar of "Standard" English. It is a Zen- of-Python-like collection of precepts, many of which inform my own writing in Japanese (!!) as well as in English, and my Japanese and Chinese students have expressed appreciation for them. While the quirkiness of Strunk & White appeals to me personally, replacing it with an explicit set of guidelines directly modeled on the Zen or an alternative reference would serve the purpose as well. But I do not know of a good substitute for this purpose. I don't think David's suggestion of Zinsser would serve so well. It is a textbook and quite discursive[1], while the table of contents of Strunk & White is quite Zen-like, and little more than twice as long as the Zen. From the lack of any mention of this aspect of Strunk & White, it's clear that the commit was made with little or no consideration for the many developers, current and potential, whose native language is *not* English, nor for some neuro-atypical programmers, for whom generalities like "be clear" may be deterring and explicit rules comforting. That doesn't mean simple removal of that reference was the wrong thing to do, but it does mean that removing it without replacement needs more justification than "it's a 'relic of white supremacy'". I agree that the goal of encouraging diversity among community members justifies substantial cost, which is repaid in many ways. It is certainly true that some of the precepts of Strunk & White are simple grammar rules that are specific to Standard English, and in that sense center whiteness. But the loss to some, perhaps many, developers from failing to provide *any* concrete guidelines may be large. That should have been considered before committing, and in my opinion, replacement guidelines or an alternative reference included. This loss was mentioned several times in the discussion on Python Ideas -- and ignored. I sure hope it will be considered now. Steve Footnotes: [1] And probably suffers from "centering whiteness," though perhaps not to the degree that Strunk & White does. It's been a while since I've looked at Zinsser.
Hi all, I didn't mean for there to be significant differences between what I posted here versus in the commit message. Sorry for any confusion around that! Thank you for putting them both in one place here - that is helpful. Take care, Keara On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 16:12 Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Shouldn't such feedback be also cross-posted to the python-dev mailing list? Also note the original pull request, https://github.com/python/peps/pull/1470, and differences of what was written in the pull request description and what went in the commit message.
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 22:10:14 +0200 "Giampaolo Rodola'" <g.rodola@gmail.com> wrote:
From:
https://github.com/python/peps/commit/0c6427dcec1e98ca0bd46a876a7219ee4a9347...
Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without upholding relics of white supremacy. Many native English speakers do not use Standard English as their native dialect, so requiring conformation to Standard English centers whiteness in an inappropriate and unnecessary way, and can alienate and put up barriers for people of color and those whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement.
This has nothing to do with making the wording "clear and understandable" (I agree on that). It's about, once again, bringing race-based politics into Python, and spreading hate towards a specific group of people: whites. Whether you're aware of it or not, there is a term for this: it's racism. I want to remind everyone that most of us here simply want to contribute code. We do it for free, and don't want to be involved in "this", because frankly it's disgusting. Doing something out of passion and for free, and at the same time seeing these sorts of things happening on a regular basis, looks and feels like an insult, and will only lead to people leaving this place.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:27 PM Keara Berlin <kearaberlin@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all, this is a very small change, but I thought I would field it here to see if anyone has suggestions or ideas. Instead of requiring that comments be written in Strunk & White Standard English, PEP-8 should require instead that English-language comments be clear and easily understandable by other English speakers. This accomplishes the same goal without alienating or putting up barriers for people (especially people of color) whose native dialect of English is not Standard English. This change is a simple way to correct that while maintaining the original intent of the requirement. This change may even make the requirement more clear to people who are not familiar with Strunk & White, since for programmers, the main relevant aspect of that standard is "be clear and concise;" simply saying that instead of referencing Strunk & White may communicate this more effectively. Here is the current line in PEP-8: "When writing English, follow Strunk and White." I propose changing this line to "When writing English, ensure that your comments are clear and easily understandable to other English speakers." _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/AE2M7K...
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Giampaolo - gmpy.dev <https://gmpy.dev/about>
-- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/66T2R6... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
participants (24)
-
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer -
André Roberge -
Antoine Pitrou -
C. Titus Brown -
David Mertz -
Edwin Zimmerman -
Ethan Furman -
Giampaolo Rodola' -
Greg Ewing -
Jeff Allen -
Jim F.Hilliard -
Keara Berlin -
Kyle Stanley -
Martin Dengler -
MRAB -
Nathaniel Smith -
Paul Sokolovsky -
Rhodri James -
Richard Damon -
Ricky Teachey -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Steve Holden -
Steven D'Aprano -
Thomas Wouters