TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Code of Merit: A meritocratic approach to project management (2016)

48 点作者 _Marak_超过 6 年前

10 条评论

jawns超过 6 年前
Do you know who&#x27;s going to gravitate toward projects with a Code of Merit instead of a Code of Conduct?<p>People who are ostracized by projects with a Code of Conduct.<p>Or, to put it another way, if you&#x27;re a jerk and you argue with other contributors about an on-topic issue in a jerky way, then under a Code of Merit, you still come out on top as long as you&#x27;re technically correct (the best kind of correct!), even if it leaves other contributors feeling put down.<p>Granted, there is some overlap. For example, both the Code of Merit and most codes of conduct disallow disparaging remarks based on protected characteristics. But the Code of Merit disallows them because they&#x27;re considered irrelevant to the project, whereas codes of conduct disallow them because they&#x27;re affronts to dignity.<p>I do take issue with many codes of conduct in the tech space, because I think they tend to be written in a bubble world where everyone assumes that everyone else thinks just like them, but a Code of Merit sounds like it&#x27;s even more problematic.
评论 #18075200 未加载
评论 #18074906 未加载
评论 #18075073 未加载
评论 #18075198 未加载
评论 #18076957 未加载
评论 #18075169 未加载
mabbo超过 6 年前
&gt; Individual characteristics, including but not limited to, body, sex, sexual preference, race, language, religion, nationality, or political preferences are irrelevant in the scope of the project and will not be taken into account concerning your value or that of your contribution to the project.<p>This sounds good, but a clause like this can easily backfire. What happens if a high ranking member is (whether they know it or not) a bigot or sexist? Anytime someone tries to challenge them calling out their behavior, they&#x27;re likely to point to this Code and say &quot;stop making this about gender&#x2F;race as that violates the code of merit&quot;. They can use the very rules meant to stop them as a weapon to silence those who would criticize.<p>The document presumes good intentions by all those participating. Good intentions don&#x27;t work- mechanisms do. I see no mechanisms here.
评论 #18074914 未加载
评论 #18074981 未加载
评论 #18074957 未加载
评论 #18074835 未加载
rectang超过 6 年前
The author who coined the term &quot;meritocracy&quot;, Michael Young, meant it as satire.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy</a><p>&gt; <i>&quot;It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others.&quot;</i><p>Here are the two key criteria from the <i>Code of Merit</i> governing how contributors are rewarded:<p>&gt; <i>4. Authority or position in the project will be proportional to the accrued contribution. Seniority must be earned.</i><p>&gt; <i>5. Software is evolutive: the better implementations must supersede lesser implementations. Technical advantage is the primary evaluation metric.</i><p>However, these are inherently subjective measures, dependent on who is among the project&#x27;s &quot;managing members&quot; and thus in a position to propose candidates and render judgement. At the very least it is an unstable system in the absence of formal governance mechanisms (e.g. 2&#x2F;3 majority rule on proposed candidates) and committed leadership.<p>Ultimately, it is frighteningly difficult to avoid calcifying into an exclusive group, fulfilling the satirical prophesies of &quot;meritocracy&quot;.
评论 #18075050 未加载
ergo14超过 6 年前
I don&#x27;t get why this would be an alternative - those two can and should supplement eachother.
评论 #18074843 未加载
评论 #18074610 未加载
alkonaut超过 6 年前
This to me looks like the &quot;all lives matter&quot; equvialent. It&#x27;s basically an idea that no one can object to on face value, because there is obviously nothing objectionable about it, but when being presented as an <i>alternative</i> to something else it makes it completely different.<p>This type of code will be chosen by the kind of people that were angry about the linux CoC. So sadly even though this document has nothing obviously wrong with it, it will be a huge red flag on a project.
评论 #18075113 未加载
评论 #18075086 未加载
评论 #18075139 未加载
xyproto超过 6 年前
I think the whole concept of &quot;final say&quot; is both poorly defined and poorly thought out. Should people not be allowed to speak their mind? Should they not be free to do work (merit) in the direction of their choosing? It should be up to the project owners if the work should be included in their project or not, but &quot;final say&quot;? Pffft.
geofft超过 6 年前
If you actually believe in meritocracy, it seems like a problem that the Contributor Covenant is in use by several high-profile projects that have had no noticeable loss of technical quality or failure since adopting it, and the Code of Merit is in use by ... no one. (Google the phrase in the README to confirm that.)<p>So, the meritocratic option is to adopt the Contributor Covenant and the incident-handling practices it comes with, which empirically help produce great projects. The only reason to adopt the Code of Merit is ideological attraction to its worldview outweighing the desire for a better technical project.
评论 #18077439 未加载
pferde超过 6 年前
If you have to write this down and formalize it, you have already lost.
评论 #18074922 未加载
play2computers超过 6 年前
While this is an interesting idea, I&#x27;m not sure such an approach is going to work long term. This establishes that nothing outside of the project has an impact on the project itself. To make a rather extreme example (Godwin says hi), if Hitler picked up coding, a code-of-merit based project wouldn&#x27;t object to him contributing to it, while most of the code of conducts I&#x27;ve seen would not. So it really comes down to: where do we draw the line?
评论 #18075058 未加载
评论 #18074796 未加载
评论 #18075039 未加载
评论 #18074949 未加载
评论 #18074784 未加载
评论 #18074870 未加载
评论 #18074764 未加载
pjc50超过 6 年前
This establishes the &quot;dictator for life&quot; idiom without bothering with the figleaf of &quot;benevolent&quot;.
评论 #18074880 未加载
评论 #18075060 未加载