Github ignoring "reverse racism" complaints policy

Boycotted:

GitHub - Git hosting with a free tier. Censored the C Plus Equality (C+=), GamerGateOP, ToleranUX, WebM for Retards projects.
BitBucket - Mercurial and Git hosting with a free tier for up to 5 users. Censored the C Plus Equality (C+=) project.
Google Code - Free Git, Mercurial, and Subversion hosting with 2 GB of storage. Censored the C Plus Equality (C+=) project. New project creation has been disabled as of 2015-03-12. Site will become read only on 2015-08-24. Site will shut down completely on 2016-01-26.
GitLab - Free Git hosting. Censored the GamerGateOP project.
Gitorious - Free Git hosting. Hosts a mirror of the C Plus Equality (C+=) project, but censored the GamerGateOP project. Is in the process of being acquired by GitLab.
SourceForge - Free Mercurial, Git, and Subversion hosting. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support. Has started to bundle malware in the Windows installers of some projects without the knowledge or consent of project owners.

Supported:

GitGud, previously hosted here - Free Git hosting. Hosts the GamerGateOP repo. Should be used primarily for GamerGate-related projects.

Neutral:

Assembla - Git, Subversion, and P4 hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
Beanstalk - Git and Subversion hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
Codebase - Mercurial, Git, and Subversion hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
Codebreak - Free Git hosting. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
CodePlex - Microsoft's free open source project hosting site. Free Mercurial, Git, and Subversion hosting. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
Freepository - Git and Subversion hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support. Currently not accepting new members.
GNU Savannah (USA), Savannah Non-GNU (USA), Gna! (France), Puszcza (Ukraine) - Free GNU Arch, GNU Bazaar, CVS, Git, Mercurial, and Subversion hosting for projects by the Free Software Foundation and projects with a GPL-compatible license. (This applies to all four servers. The branding of the second server is ironic.) No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
JavaForge - Free CVS, Git, Mercurial, and Subversion hosting for open source projects. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
Kiln - Mercurial and Git hosting with a free tier for up to 2 users. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
NotABug - Free Git hosting. Runs on Gogs (Go Git Service). No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
PikaCode - Free Mercurial and Git hosting. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
ProjectLocker - Git and Subversion hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
SSHControl.com - Mercurial, Git, and Subversion hosting with a free tier. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.
TuxFamily - Free Mercurial, Git, and Subversion hosting. No known history of either SJW ideology or GamerGate activism support.

Self-hosting:

These web UIs for Git are available for self-hosting.

>>39

People of color can be prejudiced against whites but clearly do not have the power as a group to enforce that prejudice [as racism].

Feel free to replace ``People of color'' with ``women'' and ``whites'' with ``men'', if you want. Do you get it yet?

>>38
Ha ha ha! No power! If you think men are in charge, go to Ikea. You'll see who spends the money and who carries the furniture.

>>40
Whom are you quoting? Just kidding. I don't understand what you're saying though. (English is not my first language)

>>42
>>40-san's quote is saying racism/sexism towards cis white men doesn't count because minorities don't have the power to make a difference.

>>43
In the same vein, antisemitism doesn't real because we don't have the power to throw off the yoke of the Bilderbergs, Zukerbergs and other financial elite.

>>44
That's debatable, but you can easily make this point: Same goes for antisemitism because tin-foil hatters are a minority.

>>43
Okay so reverse-racism is when minorities are racist.
Alright, and is >>38 saying that exactly? Or does it claim that reverse racism is alo racism?

Basically, what is the point here? Because if the point is that minorities can be racist 'for free', I don't agree with that.

>>46
fuck out

>>47
I'm sorry I don't want to waste my time listening to >>38 and request a written argument instead. I read wikipedias article on reverse racism and it's not a new concept, it just describes racism in a particular setting.

Moreover, reading what cisgender is (what >>38 called people who need educating), I disagree again. Here's the definition I'm using from Wikipedia:

individuals who have a match between the gender they were assigned at birth, their bodies, and their personal identity

I don't see the reason why a person needs to be constant, in this regard. Why must it be a permanent choice to identify with your body? Why can't you identify with your body at some point, later change mind, and then change your mind again? In fact, what does it mean to identify? How do we classify thoughts into woman thoughts and man thoughts (or woman feelings and man feelings)?

I personally have a sense of what it is to be woman and what it is to be man, externally and internally (that is, others behavior and my own thoughts). I always sense both worlds in both cases: All people act manly and womanly, and all people think womanly and manly. Moreover, what I have classified as womanly and manly is not absolute, but relative. It really is like painting with colours, and how colours are perceived by us (we might be colorblind, for instance).

Of course, me, a most likely insane person who does not have the slightest affiliation to society, and most likely a misanthrope as well, could be seeing all these matters as unimportant and obvious, exactly for this reason. I do state that I am such a person, as to avoid being labeled sexist, and/or whatever else. Pity me instead, but I believe my opinion to have value to you.

IHBT, why did I type this up

>>43

doesn't count because minorities don't have the power to make a difference.

You've never lived in an inner city have you? If you lived in a gated white community then I would agree minorities don't have the power to make a difference for you because you've never see one in real life to begin with.

>>46

if the point is that minorities can be racist 'for free'

That is the only point unfortunately.

>>48
You wont get a deep answer. It's no use to get deep in the discussion unless you are looking for answers yourself.

*unless you are looking for answers in your own reflections.

There's no racism "for free", there's just prejudice and racism.

A black person can be prejudiced against a white man. However, this is not racism:

A white man can be prejudiced against a black man. However, this is racism, because the white man also dominates the institution, and has generationally enforced his prejudice through this domination.

To me, its perfectly reasonable to delineate the two concepts. You might not agree with their choice of language, but you are also self-admittedly a nutjob, so it doesn't really matter.

>>51
That's just statistics, and the so-called system is just a cloud of things that the white man dominates the black man, for your definition to work. Unless you believe that, for example, black policemen have never done wrong on white men. Or perhaps you're saying that happens but is rare.

If we are to look at the statistically dominant case, wouldn't you also need to mention a country? Basically, isn't >>38 just US stuff? Why don't you mention the state too? I bet SF and TX differ.

Who decides what is and what isn't? I kinda have a hard time understanding this. Are you saying you are the frontiers of the English language? Or that you are the best at understanding the God-given definitions of words and thus decided to podcast at >>38 educating us?

I think you're just making stuff up. So what if something is racism and something is not? It's not like we have racism badges or the racism police to arrest people when they're racist. Unless you want to 'fight racism' so you're trying to have a precise definition of what you want to fight, which again is absurd, because you want to fight the most dominant statistical case. So you're not fighting racism, but the most dominant statistical case. You want to smoothen out some numbers in some statistics!

Obviously, a lot of people who fight for something might have this as a side-result, to smooth out some numbers, but you have that as a goal! Are you blind?

Are you saying that the poor man wishing misfortunes to the rich man is not as bad as the rich man wishing misfortunes to the poor man, because the later can make it happen while the former can not? What about when they switch places in the power hierarchy? You are miseducating others, friend.

>>49,50
I don't understand that last part in your post. Why there's no use in discussing something? Because I would be looking at my own reflection? IDK, sounds weird.

>>51
Lastly, do you realize how much your definitions differ with a dictionary? For example, google:
Search Results

Prejudice is prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case.
Racism The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

Personally, I mean in the little picture, this [assertion that men can be victims] is absolutely true. As in the example below, a woman can absolutely fire a man because she does not like men… this is where we use the term “prejudice.” This is mainly because she doesn’t have anything institutional to back her up.

In the big picture, we are talking about grand narratives that say XYZ about women, or where certain behaviors are enacted disproportionately against women. And it has something institutional behind it. For instance, the overarching trend of not wanting to hire women between the ages of 25 and 35 because it’s assumed that either a) she wants a family or b) she has a family and will the primary caretaker of the family so she will make a bad employee. This, for purposes here, it’s what called “sexism”. It’s just used to describe the big picture and not the small picture.

>>54
That definition of racism does not match the definition of reverse racism on wikipedia, nor describes the behaviour fostered by the open code of conduct. Also it doesn't have anything to do with any hypothetical black policeman mistreating a hypothetical white person, unless said hypothetical black policeman really believed on the superiority of the black race, which granted, there are some black people out there who think like this, but solely targetting a white man does not racism make. Further, racism mostly translates in practice to segregationism, which can realistically only be put into practice by a dominant group. Deprived minorites can't really segregate shit, being already segregated themselves. All in all, I really like that definition of racism you posted and I am adopting it for every internet argument that deals with racism and stuff. That power+prejudice shit is just plain dumb.
Also, wikipedia is really shit sometimes.

>>51
Is it racism if a black person kills a white person because he's white? What if a mexican person kills an asian person because he hates asians? Which are racist acts and which are not?

>>55

This is mainly because she doesn’t have anything institutional to back her up.

You don't need to be backed by an institution so do something horrible to someone. If you want to fire someone you can just make something up. It's hard. You watch them closely and wait for them to slip up, and then fire them for it. No one besides you needs to know about your true intentions. Similarly for an act of crime. A criminal doesn't consult a racist court before attacking someone. The only people involved in that decision are him and his glock. We are powerful people with self determination. As agents in the world, we can accomplish a lot, with or without an institution behind us.

*It's not hard

>>55
Why did you post kopipe?
http://feminist.livejournal.com/2618732.html?thread=75473772#t75473772
Do you or do you not have an opinion of your own? At least you added [clarifiations], but you also carelessly snipped text.

Now, who is she_obliterated? Is she some internet authority to decide what racism and prejudice means? The text you snipped says As far as I can tell from the community rules, this is where we use the term "prejudice." You shouldn't had snipped that text. It's obvious now, you're just in the wrong context. Progrider is NOT that community. We are NOT supposed to know that kind of stuff. If you want to communicate, make an effort to use English.

>>56
Ah, fuck. Now I just realized this thread is about http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/. I had forgotten. Maybe now the post in >>38 makes some sense. I apologise. (I kept the reply to >>55 in my post just to show my ignorance -- I just read >>56)

I have no fucking idea what todogroup.org is about. Reading a bit about it, I still don't get it. They are there to lay out some behavioral rules for people who develop open-source?

Reading http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct/, I see that they're saying they won't act on reverse racism. I guess it's something important for some people, this whole thing. It leaves me uninterested. I'm impressed this nonsense has made it this far, but I guess different people have different needs.

Anyway, why is >>1 pissed? Does he feel that reverse-racism is impornant? Moreover, how harsh could reverse-racism be? Just put up an alias, never mention anything about yourself and contribute to the project. You'll never encounter problems this way. I don't get it.

>>60

english

ooga booga unga bunga?

>>60
They are just using prejudice for racism and racism for institutionalized racism. No big difference. People change words in the english language when they want to lessen the impact, like liberate instead of pillage, freedom fighter instead of oil exporter, dictator instead of leader of a country that does not export oil to the USA, the Obama Regime instead of the USA, migrant worker instead of walmart employee, resistance fighters instead of terrorists funded by the Obama Regime, Ukraine instead of Russia's Appendage, Putin instead of Stalin, holocaust instead of hoax, Japanese person instead of Raper of Asia, Korean instead of apology juicer, Chinese instead of Zergling, Great Leap Forward instead of millions dead from famine, Peace instead of War, Slavery instead of Freedom, and Strength instead of Ignorance.

>>62
Brilliant! Whoa you're really good at this!

>>63
Hey I'm not the one coming up with the material. Let's see, there's more. Enhanced interrogation techniques for torture, weapons of mass destructions for aluminum pipes, going dark for privacy, the Patriot Act for abolishing the 4th amendment, the USA Freedom Act for abolishing the 4th amendment, lone wolf for american citizen, surgical precision strikes for firing hellfire missiles and gatling guns into crowded areas, ``I can see Russia from my house!'' for foreign policy qualifications, foreign policy for destabilize all nations where natural resources are located, pedophile for iphone owner, kidnapper for iphone owner, terrorist for iphone owner, espionage for reporting an illegal wiretapping program, aiding the enemy for leaking unreported civilian casualties, friendly fire incidents, and incidents where servicemen hired child prostitutes, ``Terror Tuesday'' for weekly drone strikes in Pakistan, etc.

Fug smoked too mich pot shieet w@w

>>52
I'm explaining the reasoning behind these "Reverse-Racism Doesn't Exist" people. >>62 is right,

They are just using prejudice for racism and racism for institutionalized racism. No big difference.

>>1 is pissed because he's now forced to do what countless niggers and women have been forced to do throughout history: pretend to be or emulate the opposite of what they are simply to be taken seriously in society.

>>66
not "taken seriously" but not be banned or harassed

You're all mad because "reverse racist" is the favorite strawman for actual racists, and everyone caught on to it already.

>>68
I'm only mad because these people are using the same tactic corrupt governments to achieve their means, by redefining the english language. They have a point but they should use the proper terms to argue their points. Then you don't say ridiculous things like a minority can't be racist to a white male, when they mean a minority can't apply institutionalized racism. See? Everything becomes clear when you just use proper terminology.

>>69
Same way RMS Marx Stalin got people to start calling Linux, GNU/Linux.
By redefining the meaning of operating system

>>70

No the meaning of operating system didn't change at all, open any operating systems book and you'll find more than kernel design.

>>70
I agree, it should be called The GNU Operating System. You don't call Windows "NT", do you?

>>71
Not really. The operating system does not include cat and bash any more than the Windows OS includes solitare and chdsk. All GNUshit is optional. You could, and should, replace everything they have with BSD toolchain. What else do they have? GRUB? Use Lilo. GCC? Use Clang, which is also better because it hasn't been intentionally obfuscated to serve RMS Marx "Hitler" Stalin's paranoid delusions that someone was going to make a proprietary IDE autocomplete with it. But now I've gotten off topic. My point here is, fuck GNU.

>>73

You could, and should, replace everything they have with BSD toolchain.

But then it'd be BSD, still not Linux.

>>73
You could also replace linux with some other kernel. What is your point?

If you open any OS book you'll probably read two things:
1) The operating system is something that makes its users life easier by abstracting some hardware tools.
2) The scope of what needs to be made easier varies depending on when the book was written and how much the author wants to focus on the kernel parts.

While in the past an OS would be just a kernel, bootloader, terminal, ed and a few other utilitary programs, nowadays an OS is not complete without a plethora of programs and libraries for security, A/V encoding, parallelization, and so on. Whether or not these tools sit in kernel or userspace is more of a performance vs security issue, since any modern kernel is modular enough to support every kind of weird use with enough tinkering; this doesn't change the borders of what a kernel is, and by extension, what an OS is besides it.

The definition of OS also didn't change, the goal post just moved, and while in the past you might be tempted to think Linux was a complete OS (not by a fat chance), today it is obviously wrong.

And this has nothing to do with micro vs monolithic kernels.

I will never call it GNU\Linux. RMS should have picked a less stupid name.

>>77
I will always check your dubs. >>79-san should check your dubs too.

>>88 Good luck!

>>77
It cannot stupid when it's accurate. What is stupid is overloading names within the same domain.

>>76
The OS serves the computer user.

Back in the olden days, computer users were programmers & operators.

Today, computer users are Eternal September fucktards who can't get a machine to do anything without everything under the sun preinstalled.

>>71
I think you'll find the opposite.
Every OS book I've looked at defines operating system as kernel.
They all describe applications as not being part of the operating system.

>>73
What about Emacs, a component of the GNU operating system?

>>73
A computer software system is divided into two distinctions: the operating system and application software. The operating system includes cat and bash and GRUB and sed. The fact that these programs are trivially exchangeable doesn't change their role as an operating system to provide fundamental services on which to manage the rest of the application software.

>>82
And every old school OS hacker that I've met defines OS kernel as a single part of a wider operating system. They didn't write textbooks as a few other people did.

>>70
It should actually be called GNU/BSD/Linux if stallman is really accurate in his hypocrisy, since a lot of BSD code ends up in GNU... OpenSSH, and a million other things cross pollinate into GNU systems. Stallman would never call it BSD/LINUX or BSD/GNU/LINUX because BSD stands for Blind Stallman Dork

AAAAAAAAAAAAA

*takes and HUGE shit right on the fuckin floor*

>>86
I'm going to start calling it BSD/GNU/Linux

>>88
I'm going to start calling it OS X.