On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:01 AM, James Keener <j...@jimkeener.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry for the double post. > > > If you read the reporting guidelines, it is requested that someone > filing a > report provides as much evidence as possible, and that is a really > important provision, both for the person reporting and for the committee > to review and adjudicate fairly. > > What does fairly mean? > > Let's role play. I'll be a homophobic person. > > You've just submitted a proposal suggesting that we change master-master > replication to be multi-partner replication. I've told you I don't like the > wording because of it's implication of supporting homosexual marriage, > which I believe to be a personal offense to me, my marriage, and my "deeply > held religious beliefs". You tell me that's not your intent and that you do > not plan to change your proposed wording. You continue to use the term in > all correspondences on the list and I continually tell you that supporting > gay marriage is offensive and that you need to not be so deeply offensive. > I submit all our correspondences to the CoC committee and complain that > you're purposely using language that is extremely offensive. > > What is a "fair" outcome? Should you be banned? Should you be forced to > change the wording of your proposal that no one else has complained about > and others support? What is a fair, just outcome? > > Jim God I love you , Jim!! Again, just roleplaying of course. :-)
