On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi! > > > This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's > > a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project > > OK, that is clear enough, but I see an issue here - we'd be applying an > pressure that would very quickly modify behavior towards using > sockpuppet accounts. In fact, since we're all smart people here, I think > one instance of enforcement would switch virtually all abuse to > sockpuppets - why risk CoC complaints if you can make a new account with > a witty name and vent freely? > Which would mean if our goal were to reduce abuse, it would fail very > fast. In fact, sockpuppets probably would be more abusive, since > Speaking Truth To Power is so much fun. > > Of course, if we have clearly understood limits - such as discussion by > project members in a project-related context - it would not hurt. I'm > afraid it wouldn't help much either. > -- > Stas Malyshev > smalys...@gmail.com > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy while what you are saying it is possible, but 1, the fact that the proposed solution doesn't solve every hypothetical scenario doesn't mean that the solution is bad, it just means that it isn't perfect. 2, one of the reasons for the CoC is to send a clear message that the project doesn't support/endorse some kind of behavior, so if somebody uses a sockpuppet while that makes it impossible for us to take any measure, but that already made it clear that he/she doesn't talks for our project. -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
