On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 20:49 +, Andrew Sobala wrote:
[snip]
So let's link to it from www.gnome.org, and we're finished with this. Am
I right?
The signatures drive
http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct/Signatures
was quite successful, so I plan to go ahead with this.
--
Murray Cumming
I forgot to say that I can be arrogant myself. Arrogance is always
better perceive by the others.
--
Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericaconamor.org
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
Ar Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 03:02:42PM +0100, ysgrifennodd Dave Neary:
The feeling of the board (a majority opinion, rather than unanimous) is
that the code of conduct would be more hurt than helped by being pushed
by us. Its adoption really needs to be bottom-up.
The issue is divisive, even
Hi Telsa,
Telsa Gwynne wrote:
Ar Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 03:02:42PM +0100, ysgrifennodd Dave Neary:
The feeling of the board (a majority opinion, rather than unanimous) is
that the code of conduct would be more hurt than helped by being pushed
by us. Its adoption really needs to be bottom-up.
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 20:04 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:43 +0100, Danilo Šegan wrote:
Today at 18:44, Murray Cumming wrote:
But yes, I'll try the endorsement strategy if I have to.
I prefer Adrian Custer's suggestion.
Tell me where to sign! :)
Let's
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 05:50:53PM +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 20:04 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:43 +0100, Danilo Šegan wrote:
Today at 18:44, Murray Cumming wrote:
But yes, I'll try the endorsement strategy if I have to.
I
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:53 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
I signed the code of conduct under the strict condition that there is no
official enforcement of these principles, and that it should not be
interpreted like a legal document.
s/condition/assumption/ ?
No. It's a condition that I
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:27:27PM +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:53 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
I signed the code of conduct under the strict condition that there is no
official enforcement of these principles, and that it should not be
interpreted like a legal
This seems wildly tangential. There's a loss of perspective. The code of
conduct is rather unlikely to become the tool of a fascist regime. If
you think that is a significant risk then just don't sign the thing.
It already has clear language saying that it's not a legal document and
there's no
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 20:45 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
This seems wildly tangential. There's a loss of perspective. The code of
conduct is rather unlikely to become the tool of a fascist regime. If
you think that is a significant risk then just don't sign the thing.
I agree and I too think
Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 07:27:27PM +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:53 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
I signed the code of conduct under the strict condition that there is no
official enforcement of these principles, and that it should not be
On 12/4/06, Andrew Sobala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has 82 signatures. Last year 169 members could be bothered to vote
for the board. It sounds like we've pretty much got community adoption
now, or will in a couple of days ;-)
Additionally, the mailing list consensus is that no top-down
On 12/3/06, Danilo Šegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yesterday at 4:03, Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote:
Should the CoC page be frozen or something? Signing something on a Wiki
is rather strange...
Good point. I've subscribed myself to CoC page, so I can unsign it
if it changes in a way I
Hi,
Alan Horkan wrote:
Code of conduct:
Dont be an asshat
I'm baffled as to why the board cannot agree on this.
Let me be clear:
The vast majority of the board (I think everyone) agrees with the idea
of a code of conduct.
That is not in question.
But I don't think that imposing a code
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Dave Neary wrote:
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 10:24:47 +0100
From: Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Alan Horkan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Foundation-List foundation-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: Code of conduct (bis)
Hi,
Alan Horkan wrote:
Code of conduct:
Dont
Hi Dave!
But I don't think that imposing a code of conduct by High Command from
the board is healthy, and I don't think it will help its adoption.
Well, the board is no high court which comes from heavon but elected
from all members of the GNOME Foundation. All members of the gnome
community
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Quim Gil wrote:
I'm baffled as to why the board cannot agree on this. I sincerely
hope we've gotten past the point where people still disagree with the
basic idea and we are only arguing a matter of degrees.
I think decisions like Olav's using the *CoC* to try to
Hi,
Murray Cumming wrote:
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 15:02 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
The feeling of the board (a majority opinion, rather than unanimous) is
that the code of conduct would be more hurt than helped by being pushed
by us. Its adoption really needs to be bottom-up.
Thanks for being
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 18:31 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
[snip]
The main use of a
code being written down is to ensure that newcomers to the project
know
where they stand, what they can expect, and (if they don't respect the
code) why they're being given out to.
[snip]
So let's assume this for
Today at 18:44, Murray Cumming wrote:
But yes, I'll try the endorsement strategy if I have to.
I prefer Adrian Custer's suggestion.
Tell me where to sign! :)
Cheers,
Danilo
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:43 +0100, Danilo Šegan wrote:
Today at 18:44, Murray Cumming wrote:
But yes, I'll try the endorsement strategy if I have to.
I prefer Adrian Custer's suggestion.
Tell me where to sign! :)
Let's see how this works out:
Anne Østergaard wrote:
Hi Murray and everyone
I am in favor of a code of conduct.
Here is my go of a text:
I'm confused - now we have seemingly 2 codes of conduct. Which is the one to be
signed? I'd be reluctant to sign anything that is in the process of changing.
Glynn
On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 09:24 +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
Anne Østergaard wrote:
Hi Murray and everyone
I am in favor of a code of conduct.
Here is my go of a text:
I'm confused - now we have seemingly 2 codes of conduct. Which is the one to
be
signed?
The one that's on
On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 09:24 +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
Anne Østergaard wrote:
Hi Murray and everyone
I am in favor of a code of conduct.
Here is my go of a text:
[snip]
I'd be reluctant to sign anything that is in the process of changing.
Should the CoC page be frozen or
24 matches
Mail list logo
