Re: Code of Conduct final draft?

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Quim Gil">

> The Ubuntu community decided to have a CoC since their early stages and
> there was not much fuzz about it. This shows that probably a CoC is good
> for that community. 
> 
> The GNOME community has growth for years without a CoC and now that it is
> being proposed to have one there is no consensus. This shows that probably
> a CoC is not good for this community. 

Why does a lack of consensus show that a CoC would not be good? The lack of
consensus seems to be about the name much more than the content, so I don't
think lack of consensus points to inappropriateness of a CoC (or similar
document) at all.

> Still, external references are useful. There are many communities doing
> well out there without a CoC. Can you provide examples of mature
> communities being benefited by the late adoption of a CoC? 

That sounds like we're unwilling to be trailblazers. We couldn't point to
many communities operating with a time-based release process when we tried
it; now it's regarded as best practice.

> - But I don't think this list of recommendations should be named a Code of
> Conduct. It is not just a wording thing.

That sounds *exactly* like a wording thing! There is no reason why we can't
come up with a document that a) has a different name and b) has a specific
intent for *our* community. All this arguing about the name actually takes
the focus off doing something good for our community.

> - Who would arbitrate in our case?

The GNOME Foundation Board of Directors is the group elected to represent
the community and provide conflict resolution where required. Creating a
document that states our expectations and values does *not* immediately
require a strict governance model for it... unless it is interpreted from
the start as a document of rules and regulations, in which case:

 * It is already *crystal* clear that the community is not interested in a
   document of rules and regulations... so let's stop discussing it in those
   terms!

 * It's already pretty clear that a document called the "Code of Conduct" is
   not going to be acceptable... so let's stop discussing it in those terms!

We already have rough consensus on these points, no need to keep coming back
to them. I haven't really answered the rest of your mail, because it all
comes down to "Code of Conduct" vs "let's write a document that demonstrates
our shared vision and expectations to ourselves and others".

I'll repeat my major point, so hopefully we can get back to the interesting
part of the debate: I haven't heard anyone railing against the *content* of
the document Murray (and others) put together, in fact a few have said it
isn't wide-ranging enough. I have heard quite a few people railing against
the name of the document, and potential as-yet-undiscussed governance models
for it. That's okay... But it's a bummer when it dominates the discussion to
the detriment of doing something cool.

Can we try this again without everyone getting caught on "Code of Conduct"?

- Jeff

-- 
linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia           http://lca2007.linux.org.au/
 
    "MySQL supporters are like people who believe that the moon landings
    were a hoax. No matter what contrary information they're confronted
         with, they still consider MySQL to be the best." - ttfkam