From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines? Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:50:52 +0100 Message-ID: <87woq03amb.fsf@elephly.net> References: <11169507.O9o76ZdvQC@aleksandar-ixtreme-m5740> <58c24819-89fb-3ae9-c08a-5b7a5906fb90@freenet.de> <87muqx9en0.fsf@gmail.com> <94d03283-16c9-1d04-c278-c87b77f08acf@freenet.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38088) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBh5-0002j7-T8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:51:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBh0-00013R-UR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:51:15 -0400 Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com ([135.84.80.216]:21027) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBh0-00013D-LX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:51:10 -0400 In-reply-to: <94d03283-16c9-1d04-c278-c87b77f08acf@freenet.de> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: t_w_@freenet.de Cc: alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com, guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Thorsten, > On 29/10/2018 12.27, Alex Sassmannshausen wrote: > >>> The association with the primary author makes some people think of the >>> ... fighting stance of her, the anti-meritocracy thing and her use of >>> 2nd-hand "quotes" to get people into trouble (trying to keep it short >>> here, thus far from exact). >> >> I think if you make these assertions you might want to bring context. >> As it stands it reads a little like "poisoning the well": you seem to >> imply the CC is bad because allegedly the author has done bad things in >> the past. > > No, I'm saying that some opposition is motivated by the desire to have > nothing to do with her, whatsoever. In order to not go off-topic, I > tried to outline where the intensity might come from in short form. > > Of course the rational thing is to separate the CoC from its primary > author. But then CoC supporters like to explain how offense depends on > the feeling of those offended, so maybe you might not want to declare > this aspect of it to be meaningless. > > Discussions regarding the CoC and Ehmke tend to attract problematic > comments, but the start of this seems reasonable enough: > https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/974038-why-the-linux-coc-is-bad/ > > Two interesting reactions to attempts to establish the CoC in projects: > https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#note-95 > http://paul-m-jones.com/archives/6214 Please try to avoid redirecting the focus of this thread by referencing unrelated topics. The Guix maintainers have used the CoC in the past to investigate and respond to harassment reports. I would appreciate it if you didn=E2=80=99t= make assumptions about how this happens when you don=E2=80=99t have that kind of information and you don=E2=80=99t shoulder this responsibility. Otherwise people might easily misunderstand your comments. -- Ricardo