> by writing that codes of conduct are "punitive spirit", RMS shows a misunderstanding of how these texts came into existence
Why? It seems like he's just recognising that these codes are heavily focused on identifying and punishing "bad actors" rather than correcting the undesirable behaviour, or developing practices that reduce the chance of undesirable exchanges from occurring.
If Linus really is as socially incapable of recognising the effects of his tone, then punishing him for something he doesn't understand serves no purpose, and you'll lose a good contributor as well.
> correcting the biases, conscious or not, that have led to the poor diversity of our communities, must be part of our mission
Aren't you assuming the conclusion here? Uneven demographics are not necessarily indicative of any kind of bias. If you just focus on good encouraging good communication practices that aren't exclusionary, anything beyond that is unnecessary to officially codify. Certainly you can make that a personal goal, but you're talking about taking it far beyond that.
Why? It seems like he's just recognising that these codes are heavily focused on identifying and punishing "bad actors" rather than correcting the undesirable behaviour, or developing practices that reduce the chance of undesirable exchanges from occurring.
If Linus really is as socially incapable of recognising the effects of his tone, then punishing him for something he doesn't understand serves no purpose, and you'll lose a good contributor as well.
> correcting the biases, conscious or not, that have led to the poor diversity of our communities, must be part of our mission
Aren't you assuming the conclusion here? Uneven demographics are not necessarily indicative of any kind of bias. If you just focus on good encouraging good communication practices that aren't exclusionary, anything beyond that is unnecessary to officially codify. Certainly you can make that a personal goal, but you're talking about taking it far beyond that.