Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership
- From: Philip Van Hoof <pvanhoof gnome org>
- To: john palmieri <john j5 palmieri gmail com>
- Cc: Foundation-List <foundation-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:20:34 +0100
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 12:05 -0500, john palmieri wrote:
> I'm against an enshrined code of conduct which suddenly kicks you out
> of GNOME, or gets you shunned. A Terms of Service for hosted sites
> which gets your account unsubscribed for that site might be better if
> it is very narrowly defined, e.g. no spamming, no porn, etc. However
> as we move into the realm of who offended who it gets dicey and
> predicated on the sentiments of who is making the final call. We've
> survived the oGalaxys and Bowie Poags of the past and I don't think I
> have seen any worse conduct. I'm defering to the board if they really
> feel they need an enshrined document but there should be a vote on the
> final draft if we go in this direction.
I (fully) agree with John here.
The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason is a no for me personally.
It's also not the document that I've put my name under when I signed the
Code of Conduct any longer if that amendment is indeed added.
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Lionel Dricot <ploum ploum net>
> wrote:
>
> I believe that this discussion is becoming far too bloated.
>
> How often do we have to deal with offended people? What energy
> will we
> spend to deal with each case on a case by case basis? Answer
> is A.
>
> How much energy will we spend to try to design a law/rule that
> might fit
> every use case and will be discussed each time we have a case?
> Answer is B.
>
> I expect A << B by at least one order of magnitude.
>
> What is exactly the problem here? Sometimes some people are
> offended by
> the content of planet GNOME? OK, it has always be the case but
> it's a
> problem. A rare one but still a problem.
> What effect will have deciding of rules, CoC or punishment on
> that
> particular problem? I don't see how it could have an effect.
>
> There will still be offending stuff from time to time on pgo.
> This was
> never a problem in the past as it was handled on a case by
> case basis.
> Anyway, there are always people offended by everything.
>
>
> When you have to type a command once a year, you don't start
> developing a
> framework that will handle every possible situation. (it has
> already been
> done, it's called J2EE)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lionel
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:36:41 -0700, Stormy Peters
> <stormy peters gmail com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Mukund Sivaraman
> <muks banu com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I think this is taking it too far. The "Code of Conduct"
> being
> >> presented as a set of guidelines is OK, but it is not wise
> to make it
> >> policy. The GNOME project is not a sect, to control what I
> can and
> >> cannot say/do in public.
> >>
> >
> > We are talking about GNOME hosted platforms. Planet GNOME,
>
> > blogs.gnome.organd the GNOME mailing lists are all forums we
> host and
> > I think we can (and
> > do) expect a certain standard of conduct on them. For
> example, if
> someone
> > started spamming the Foundation list, we would block them.
> >
> > (Public does not mean you can do whatever you want. In most
> public
> places
> > there are laws you have to follow.)
> >
> > Stormy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
--
Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org
http://pvanhoof.be/blog
http://codeminded.be
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]