adaptability?

[nrdxp]

I almost want to suggest "agility", but I am purposelly trying to avoid language that has become endlessly overloaded here.

Still, we may want to encode a tenet that states essentially that we should "remain open to new ideas, strategies, decide quickly and pivot effectively and uniformly", etc etc

However, I'm not sure if that is appropriate for an "ethical code" or if that is more in line with a potential companion procedural document?

[nrdxp]

just to expand a bit further, we may also be able to use "openness" instead of "adaptability". This would also give us a legitimate take on the value of the horrendously ideologized "inclusivity" by now, expanding on its actual virtue while avoiding its abuses.

Still though, I want it to be an actual ethic that is actually useful and concise. The overarching goal of this document is to make hacker ethics "as simple as possible, no simpler". Anything superflous should be omitted, but I don't want to miss anything essential either.

Actually, maybe just "simplicity" would be the right answer here? It is simpler to include anyone who wants to participate and align with the goals and tenets than it is to be endlessly trying to discern the extend of "marginalization", for example. It is simpler to realign and pivot quickly than it is to miss an opportunity and have to recoup after losing momentum, etc, etc.

[blaggacao]

just to expand a bit further, we may also be able to use "openness" instead of "adaptability". This would also give us a legitimate take on the value of the horrendously ideologized "inclusivity" by now, expanding on its actual virtue while avoiding its abuses.

I think there's one last 7th slot for "Openness", it's not only a social, but also a technical virtue and, hence, of double use.

"Simplicity" is appealing, but we can also set it through precedent and enact it as an unwritten principle in our comms and code, whereas "Openness" not really, it lives through practice and aspiration.

[nrdxp]

I've made a somewhat unilateral decision here, but since I've kept in mind that "everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler" through this process and drafting, that it would be somewhat silly not to encode it. However, I think I have found another value (flexibility) that is of equal value and I've made an adjustment here (see the commit).

It also undoes #1, but I believe that is sufficiently encapsulated by the existing ethics at this point and can be explacated separately in a companion procedure document.