Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?)

[Alex Sassmannshausen <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com>]

Thanks for your answers.  I'm glad to hear that there might be room for
some form of dialogue on wording.

Cheers!

Alex

Thorsten Wilms writes:

> On 31/10/2018 09.58, Alex Sassmannshausen wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, would you personally feel better about the CoC if it
>> used terms such as "This community commits to" or "This community
>> pledges to" insteead of "We as contributors commit to"?
>
> In as far as contributing doesn't make one part of the community
> ... it would be a slight improvement. On the other hand, it's just
> vaguer about whom it puts words into their mouths.
>
>
>> I ask because one of the positives about the CC wording from my
>> perspective is that it specifically makes it a collective responsibility
>> to uphold certain norms, and not just the responsibility of the
>> "projec authorities".  It is understood that there are specific channels
>> for dealing with violations of those norms, but the community as a whole
>> stands behind that.
>
> Yeah, that's the positive reading. A negative is that it is an attempt
> to push people to declare a mixed bag as their own, with no voice in
> the process (other than take it or leave it). One that contains
> hard-to-argue-with aspects, but also questionable and vague parts.