Matt Prelude wrote on 09/02/2016 13:56:
If the Drupal CWG have not needed to impose punishments as a result of
their
CoC, and in the history of Internals you could count the bans on one
hand,
then I really don't see why we need to go to the lengths of establishing
committees and punishment procedures.
Having procedures for violation and not using them could still have
value. The most famous example of this is surely nuclear weapons, which
are frequently cited as a deterrent, not intended for actual use.
A less violent example in the UK would be the phrase which came up when
arranging a coalition government, "avoid embarrassing the Queen" - the
Queen has the constitutional right to appoint a Prime Minister, but
forcing her to do so would be a major failing of the normal processes.
Her constitutional value lies, paradoxically, in her not exercising any
of her constitutional powers, because it forces people to negotiate a
solution which doesn't require them.
In the context of a CoC, having some escalation procedures for if people
refuse to compromise sharpens the minds of those involved - they can't
just half-heartedly reply to a complaint and carry on as they were, but
have to at least engage with the issue raised. Thinking about it, the
same happens in many civil court cases - nobody would agree to an "out
of court settlement" if there was no court case to be avoided.
So insisting on having "teeth", but assuring people that they will
probably never be used, is a justifiable position, not a contradiction.
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
