Ludovic, ...,

Re the Social Contract I'm sure greater minds than mine have looked at
it but I feel obliged to make some sort of response of which the next
paragraph is the only
important one.

Given the two options "I endorse" or "I do not adhere to" may I be bold as
to choose
the third option, i.e. no thanks, not interested, neither answer is
acceptable to me.
Please be so kind as to record that somewhere and if you make any public
lists of
responses it would be nice to put that in.

The following issues lead me to the above:

1. I understand from an email from RMS that he is not entirely supportive.
Happy to be corrected.
2. In general peoples behaviour tends to be fairly good, in my experience
or there is a reason behind
   it, either way I'm inclined to leave it as is. [e.g. I've never seen any
bias against people on the
   basis of sexual orientation, ... from the workers, the managers yes]
3.  The CoC looks fundamentally flawed with the usual "Any other
conduct... clause.."
   (BTW why not

And the language for the options whilst probably correct in some sense
seems odd since
option 2 results in:

'I do not adhere to the policy of providing a harrasment free environment
to all people"

That doesn't entirely seem to be a safe response in this current world.


Phil Maker
email: <>
phoneemail: <> -- email to phone (fastest)
phone: +61 (0)447 630 229

"Think on this doctrine, that reasoning beings were created for one
another's sake; that to be patient is a branch of justice, and that men sin
without intending it" -- Marcus Aurelius

Reply via email to