Re: Code Of Conduct

El dc 31 de 05 del 2006 a les 19:05 +1000, en/na Jeff Waugh va escriure:

> So, does common sense make things less exciting?

I didn't say that. The GNOME community has a lot of common sense, and
this is one of the most exciting things I find in this project.

What is less exciting is the feeling of needing to write down a Code of
Conduct. Specially if there is not a clear need of it. 

At the very end what we want is that people behave respectfully in the
GNOME sphere. Well, this is what all ethical, religious and legal
systems try to do with the citizenship. Instead of writing a new code
why don't we just encourage people to be good persons, participants,
contributors...? Did your mother or your mates ever came with a written
CoC when you misbehaved?

> but it is an extremely useful statement nonetheless.

Applied to GNOME, extremely useful what for?

> I guess I'll just fall back on the evidence as I've seen it - the Ubuntu
> Code of Conduct has communicated a very strong statement of intent, and
> ensured (not "made" but "ensured") that the Ubuntu community is a great
> place to be.

I'm not discussing the usefulness of the Ubuntu CoC, and I dind't
discuss it in the Ubuntu community either. I'm only stating that the
GNOME community has different SWAT, structure and history than the
Ubuntu community, and the tools that are useful for one community might
not be useful for the other.

> I totally object to
> the suggestions that a Code of Conduct is only needed in desperate times.

Again you are simplifying my words. I'll try to explain better.
Historically, CoC have been used in overwhelming situations or
situations with a fear of falling into them at some point, as a tool for
preventing crisis. They have been also elaborated by elites in control
of an organization in order to guarantee their stability.

You are right, I was missing more points. CoC have been also been
assumed by simple imitation of other organizations (that adopted them
for imitation as well, or for any of the previous reasons). They have
also been adopted "just because".

At the very end a CoC is a tool of control, and my main point is that we
already have tools of control in GNOME. We don't need more, if anything
we need to use better the current ones we have.

> That's poppycock.

So you mean that the existence of a
would be useful to avoid answers like this? 

Instead, you could be constructive and provide examples of CoC created
for reasons different than the ones I'm suggesting.

(To me this is a small tiny proof that the only really operative CoC is
that one assumed internally in our own personal values, attitude and

Quim Gil /// |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Aix=F2?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_=E9s?= una part d'un missatge, signada digitalment

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]