| 1 |
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 19:59 +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 2 |
> 3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC violations. Would |
| 3 |
> you like us to bounce those to the CoC people, process them using CoC |
| 4 |
> rules, or keep doing what we are doing now (generally, close them with a |
| 5 |
> note explaining why or mediate them)? (I'm talking about the "He's |
| 6 |
> being rude/sarcastic/disrespectful" sorts of things which really need to |
| 7 |
> be processed immediately and merit a warning or brief suspension if |
| 8 |
> anything.) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
How hard is it to realize that the CoC is a superset of DevRel (and |
| 11 |
other) policies? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If someone breaks DevRel policy ("be good to each other") that also |
| 14 |
happens to be a CoC rule and someone reports it to DevRel, they should |
| 15 |
actually *do* something about it, rather than trying to pass it off onto |
| 16 |
someone else or spend months engaging in witless banter about whether |
| 17 |
there's even an issue or not. After all, when the CoC was enacted, |
| 18 |
never once was it said that it would override DevRel or otherwise make |
| 19 |
DevRel invalid. If someone comes to DevRel with a problem, you're |
| 20 |
supposed to try to work out the issue with them. It really is that |
| 21 |
simple. There's no need for some kind of territorial pissing match or |
| 22 |
passing the buck. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Someone came to DevRel for help because they think DevRel can help them |
| 25 |
and it is DevRel's job to do so. The CoC was put in place to allow for |
| 26 |
catching bad behaviors *before* they would get to DevRel, without |
| 27 |
requiring someone to necessarily "report" the issue. Once a developer |
| 28 |
has reported an issue to DevRel, it's their job to work it using their |
| 29 |
own policies, as it then becomes a DevRel issue. The two things serve |
| 30 |
somewhat different purposes. The CoC was designed to curb or prevent |
| 31 |
bad behavior, where DevRel's job is to prevent bad behavior from |
| 32 |
recurring, or taking disciplinary action when necessary for repeat |
| 33 |
offenders. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 37 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 38 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 39 |
Games Developer/Foundation Trustee |
| 40 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives