I'm against an enshrined code of conduct which suddenly kicks you out of GNOME, or gets you shunned. A Terms of Service for hosted sites which gets your account unsubscribed for that site might be better if it is very narrowly defined, e.g. no spamming, no porn, etc. However as we move into the realm of who offended who it gets dicey and predicated on the sentiments of who is making the final call. We've survived the oGalaxys and Bowie Poags of the past and I don't think I have seen any worse conduct. I'm defering to the board if they really feel they need an enshrined document but there should be a vote on the final draft if we go in this direction.
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Lionel Dricot <pl...@ploum.net> wrote: > > I believe that this discussion is becoming far too bloated. > > How often do we have to deal with offended people? What energy will we > spend to deal with each case on a case by case basis? Answer is A. > > How much energy will we spend to try to design a law/rule that might fit > every use case and will be discussed each time we have a case? Answer is B. > > I expect A << B by at least one order of magnitude. > > What is exactly the problem here? Sometimes some people are offended by > the content of planet GNOME? OK, it has always be the case but it's a > problem. A rare one but still a problem. > What effect will have deciding of rules, CoC or punishment on that > particular problem? I don't see how it could have an effect. > > There will still be offending stuff from time to time on pgo. This was > never a problem in the past as it was handled on a case by case basis. > Anyway, there are always people offended by everything. > > > When you have to type a command once a year, you don't start developing a > framework that will handle every possible situation. (it has already been > done, it's called J2EE) > > Cheers, > > Lionel > > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:36:41 -0700, Stormy Peters > <stormy.pet...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Mukund Sivaraman <m...@banu.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> I think this is taking it too far. The "Code of Conduct" being > >> presented as a set of guidelines is OK, but it is not wise to make it > >> policy. The GNOME project is not a sect, to control what I can and > >> cannot say/do in public. > >> > > > > We are talking about GNOME hosted platforms. Planet GNOME, > > blogs.gnome.organd the GNOME mailing lists are all forums we host and > > I think we can (and > > do) expect a certain standard of conduct on them. For example, if > someone > > started spamming the Foundation list, we would block them. > > > > (Public does not mean you can do whatever you want. In most public > places > > there are laws you have to follow.) > > > > Stormy > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list >
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
