On 01/05/17 21:13, Virginia Fournier wrote: > Sure, provided that the discussion continues to be meaningful. However, the > pushback on a reasonable code of conduct is confounding.
Perhaps the meta-discussion is a distraction, but: the wide range of Codes of Conduct out there are indicative of the fact that it's not a one-size-fits-all thing. Regulating how humans interact with each other is a sensitive and difficult thing, particularly in groups with structural power imbalances (which are intended and recognised). There is also the secondary factor that engineers have a tendency to treat all problems as engineering problems, and when it comes to writing English, this can manifest itself as, er, "careful" wordsmithing and scope definitions. This is not looking for loopholes, it's attempting to provide certainty. Take for example Jeremy's points about "demeaning" and "inappropriate". You wrote: "Do Forum members need to reserve the right to engage in certain types of demeaning and inappropriate conduct?" Well, no I don't, not by my own definition of "inappropriate". But one person's "inappropriate" may not be the same as another's, and we don't all get to be the final judge of our own compliance to the Code of Conduct. No-one, I am sure, disagrees with the general notion that we should all be civil to each other. But I hope you can understand that we want to make sure we encode that in writing in a way which works for our group (some of whom have known each other for a very long time). Gerv _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
