| 1 |
On 2013.05.26 13:40, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Roy Bamford |
| 3 |
> <neddyseagoon@g.o> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I would delete everything from "Examples of inappropriate behavior" |
| 6 |
> to |
| 7 |
> > the credits at the end. Escalation, punishment and appeal is |
| 8 |
> already |
| 9 |
> > covered by devrel documentation. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I suspect that lack of punishment was basically the whole reason the |
| 13 |
> original CoC was written, and the whole reason the topic came up |
| 14 |
> again. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> > If you want to say anything about enforcement in the CoC remind |
| 17 |
> readers |
| 18 |
> > that everyone is responsible for enforcement. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> That sounds a bit like nobody is responsible for enforcement. The |
| 21 |
> only thing devs can do to basically do what they're already doing - |
| 22 |
> having running arguments on the lists. The only way to block |
| 23 |
> inappropriate behavior is to moderate it. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Whether we want to do that is up to the community, but the existing |
| 26 |
> CoC is fine as-is if you don't want to do anything about enforcement, |
| 27 |
> IMHO. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Rich |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
We have already tried the <small group> is responsible for enforcement |
| 34 |
approach. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Even if we encourage everyone to intervene, most won't, for many |
| 37 |
reasons, so in practice we are back to the <small group> again. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Regards, |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Roy Bamford |
| 43 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
| 44 |
elections |
| 45 |
gentoo-ops |
| 46 |
forum-mods |
| 47 |
trustees |
Archives