Hi, On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 06:00:16AM -0700, Leslie wrote: > Right now, without the CoC, someone intent on harming someone else > could harass the victim with no recourse. Is that good?
We *have* a CoC, and that is good. Right now accompanied with a
group of trusted contacts, who are very much trusted, and this is
also a good and strong signal.
What I have very uneasy feelings about is the construction of the
sanctioning mechanism (wich is the part we do not have yet). As is it
constructed, this should work well enough if everybody involved is
positive, trying to help and protect victims of CoC violations, and
not following other agendas.
The whole installation of this acknowledges that there might be players
in our community that are not positive, and are not working for the
good of others. So why do we assume that these players will not use
the CoC sanctioning mechanism for their own agenda? Society as a whole
acknowledges this in modern processes concerned with allegiations,
right of defense, and transparency.
Malcolm looks at the process as proposed from the point of view "what if
the team is constituted by people that are not pure white in heart and
actions?" - and I find these valid concerns.
What is that we want to have? A friendly climate and clear rules on
what is expected behaviour, or a strong and powerful revenge and kick-out
mechanism, without proper controls (which's existance sends its own
clear signals)?
If you make the latter too one-sided, you can't have the former.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
