From: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, "Psql_General (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: CoC [Final v2] |
Date: | 2016-01-24 10:34:12 |
Message-ID: | CAKt_ZfvY1p7aignThQv3SBqYXRb7+Gzma6FnZ11JtJHi1SAsRQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
wrote:
> On 01/23/2016 04:00 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>
>> On Jan 22, 2016, at 6:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful,
>>> productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to
>>> contribute to the PostgreSQL community. It applies to all "collaborative
>>> space", which is defined as community communications channels (such as
>>> mailing lists, IRC, submitted patches, commit comments, etc.).
>>>
>>
>> We need to also cover abuse by members of the community made outside the
>> community. Otherwise we’ll appear to give safe harbor to abusers.
>>
>
> The private lives of members are the private lives of members. Let
> whatever space they are in and the requirements of that space dictate the
> response to their behaviour.
Additionally, "if you are harassed, maybe you should consult a lawyer" is
not a bad option.
>
>
>
>> * Participants will be tolerant of opposing views.
>>>
>>
>> This statement can be used in defense of abusive behavior (“I was just
>> expressing an opposing view!”).
>>
>
> Can you provide an example of said behaviour that does not also violate
> the below?
What is abusive? And doesn't any formulation provide cover for arguably
abusive behavior?
>
>
>> * Participants must ensure that their language and actions are free
>>> of personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks.
>>>
>>> * When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants
>>> should always assume good intentions.
>>>
>>
>> This statement can be used in defense of abusive behavior (“You should
>> recognize the intention behind what I said was benign!”).
>>
>
> Yes it can and then when they are corrected, if they continue, the below
> kicks in.
>
>
>> * Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be
>>> tolerated.
>>>
>>
>> Link to enforcement policy will of course be required.
>>
>
> Yes but as mentioned earlier, first comes the CoC, then comes the
> enforcement policy.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
>
>> Best,
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>
> --
> Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
> +1-503-667-4564
> PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor
lock-in.
http://www.efficito.com/learn_more
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Travers | 2016-01-24 11:59:18 | Re: A motion |
Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2016-01-24 09:54:07 | Re: Let's Do the CoC Right |