[joshuajill]

GNU kind communication guidelines the report purports to be transphobic:

"Please think about how to treat other participants with respect, especially when you disagree with them. For instance, call them by the names they use, and refer to them using words whose meanings (as you understand them) cover those participants' stated gender identities. Please also show tolerance and respect for people who do that using different words from the words you use."

Also strongly disagree with stopping support FSF, in particular from an anonymous group.

Recommendations are quite of, despite the generally accurate and reasonable report.

[bitwize]

The "Kind Communication Guidelines" give too much wiggle room for misgendering.

It is hate speech, and a form of psychological abuse, to misgender trans people when you should know better. Depending on jurisdiction, it may incur civil or criminal penalties as well.

Again, there is a reason why the Contributor Covenant, itself written by a trans woman, is the gold standard for open source codes of conduct.

[tourmalinetaco]

If people didn’t make their identity their personality and just wrote code then it wouldn’t be a problem.

[mikrotikker]

Usernames don't have genders

[jcranmer]

> refer to them using words whose meanings (as you understand them) cover those participants' stated gender identities

If I were trans, that portion of the guideline would be enough to nope me out of participating in GNU projects. The "as you understand them" parenthetical gives cover for transphobes to intentionally misgender trans people, since they can hide behind saying that they feel it's only appropriate to use these terms for the appropriate biological sex.

[gr4vityWall]

I'm trans and the GNU Communication Guidelines feel way more empathetic to me than CoC-like documents.

> gives cover for transphobes to intentionally misgender trans people

It also gives cover to people who prefer to always use gender neutral pronouns. If a transphobe is acting on their views on gender to bully people, I'd rather deal with them on a case-by-base basis, while being empathetic to everyone else who might have meant to harm.

BTW, I've met RMS in person a few years ago, and exchange emails with him every once in a while. I've found him to be very fun, and not hard to deal with if you're used to hanging out with neurodivergent people.

[Akronymus]

I've also seen attempts at using someones mistake with misgendering someone on accident be used to start what amounts to a witchhunt in various private communities. So I really don't like it when a CoC assumed maliciousness by default, which a lot of them are.

I am no longer part of most of those communities, for both related and unrelated reasons.

[contrapunctus]

ITYM "meant _no_ harm"

[gr4vityWall]

you're correct, my bad. :)

[arp242]

Presumably this refers to his peculiar set of neologisms (“per” and “pers”) as a gender-neutral pronouns.[1]

Stallman is an extremely stubborn language hyper-pedantic with some fairly unconventional views and usages on any issue, not just this one. And he has 20 years of documented support for trans people. So with that context in mind, I think it makes sense to take it in good faith.

To say I find his position on this peculiar would be an understatement. But I find that on many of Stallman's positions on similar topics wrt. language. Either way, I'm reasonably confident it's not intended as a cover for transphobic bullying or the like, even though it may appear like that at a glance.

[1]: https://stallman.org/articles/genderless-pronouns.html

[laudation]

More like it might discourage participation from people who very much resent the fact that they can't exert control over the speech or thoughts of others. And also people who like to make mountains of molehills.