As part of an open source class assignment a group evaluated your project from the perspective of a novice/new contributor. This is part of an OSS gender inclusive initiative. There were several facets to this persona that led us to suggest a fix (please see persona attached). Before creating a PR i wanted to start the conversion on whether this fix is wanted/granted. The fix would be a simple cleanup of the README.md, moving the release notes section to a separate file and linking to that in the README.
They have captured and instrumentalized even engineering degrees to "pay" people to shill their ideology online. The dev just ignored and got away with it, but stuff like this would make me nervous if my real name is behind the project as this has a small chance of blowing up.
Am I overreacting at sneeding at tactics like these? And how would you react?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't understand what's going on here. It's an open source project, why is somebody asking permission and sumbitting a bio to make a PR? Just make it, that's the whole point. If they don't like the "fix" they just won't approve it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I understand not wanting to waste your time on work that is going to get rejected, but they already did the work for their class, making the PR would at most be 5 clicks and would've just been approved since their change is much more informative than whatever gibberish they wrote there
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
It's part of their exercise, the bio is not real. It's a "persona", a tool used by marketing people to make an avatar for categories of clients. For rdrama you'd have "Eric Chang, the incel chud" or "Jade Simmons, the girl who cut her peepee off" and you'd make up their whole personality and hobbies, like fan-fiction.
And supposedly this serves as documentation for your marketing and design teams to better serve the needs of those clients by thinking about things from their perspective.
So here this guy is saying, "I invented this woman who I imagine is your stereotypical user, and made these changes to your readme to make it more adapted to her personality." And this is of course because he is a useless frick who can't write code so the useless teacher has to make up bullshit exercises to make them feel like they're participating in the open source process.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes with the slight addendum that this personas are not for marketing but for DEI "people". They lifted it 1 to 1 from https://gendermag.org/foundations.php , whose premise seems to be that women are underrepresented in tech partly because learning materials are catered to men.
My own peer review of the site found this small amusing bit:
Source? You got a source for that?
Yes:
Where [1] is:
While I strongly suspect stereotype threat is just an artifact on the replication crisis, from my understanding about the alleged effect I fail to see how this is at all relevant to this trait of Pat or TIm or whatever, let alone a source
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Ooof big
moment from me because I somehow missed all of that, and it's way worse than I could have imagined
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
You'd create a pr without consent?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context