Re: Code of Conduct: Is it time?

This line has already been substantially changes. Can we keep discussion of the language of the WIP in the thread meant for it? This way people don't waste time discussing language which no longer exists.

Jim

On January 12, 2016 9:17:55 AM EST, Neil Tiffin <neilt(at)neiltiffin(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 12, 2016, at 7:50 AM, Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Steve Litt
><slitt(at)troubleshooters(dot)com> wrote:
>>> All because somebody just *had* to personally insult someone else,
>>> repeatedly, and nobody thought that was a bad thing, and when the
>>> recipient finally objected, the objection was chalked up to him or
>her
>>> valuing his/her victimhood.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I was thinking along the same lines when I saw JD's original list
>> containing that "victimhood" line. I think that one line pretty much
>> eviscerates the entire purpose of having the CoC.
>>
>
>I don’t remember the “victimhood” line, but it is important to make
>sure people understand that the problem manifests itself both by being
>to sensitive by the complainer and not being sensitive enough by the
>group. I do believe that in any document it needs to be stated that
>everyone is expected to be tolerant of others. A free society cannot
>exist without some level of tolerance.
>
>Neil
>
>--
>Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>To make changes to your subscription:
>http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.