Happy (upcoming) New Year indeed, all. A few thoughts:
* Personally, would be interested in working from problem to solution, not the other way around. I haven't seen problematic people on the list. (Please correct me if this is false.) * At the very least suggest to have a procedure to alter the CoC in the case it is approved. * Re "Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct" - What contributor? A person with git push access? a ML member? an IRC channel member? A definition would be needed. * "We as members, contributors, and leaders pledge to make participation in our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of [...].". What about private messaging (email to a person rather than on list)? Is that still "in our community" or not? * In my opinion such pledge may be unnecessary, it is already the law in most jurisdictions. * "We pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community." I think it would be more valuable for people here to create good mentoring or documentation infrastructure, run hackathons, pair contributors based on timezone or interest, etc. This initiative does not have to be limited to the leader. Pledging such actionable items would in my opinion be more fruitful and perhaps less intimidating with paperwork. Did not read much further. Hope this may help Gregory or others to decide the appropriate way forward.
