Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

The bottom line is that the only requisite for contributors is professionalism. People should keep non-work related issues to themselves inside the workplace, as well as they should be respectful to each other no matter what. However, if someone is professional and has never posted off-topic

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

2016-01-19 20:03 GMT+02:00 Arvids Godjuks : > Hello to everyone. > > The Draft states: > > "This Code of Conduct applies both within project spaces and in public > spaces when an individual is representing the project or its community." > > TL;DR: Just no. > > Long

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hello to everyone. The Draft states: "This Code of Conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces when an individual is representing the project or its community." TL;DR: Just no. Long version: What is the definition of "representing project or it's community". If I make a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi Anthony, Have you looked at the IETF's approach to the same issue? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-06 - Stig On Jan 10, 2016 04:48, "Anthony Ferrara" wrote: > All, > > > I was not hesitant (or, let's maybe call it "intentionally >

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

on Savage <bran...@brandonsavage.net>; > Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com>; PHP internals > <internals@lists.php.net> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > Zeev, > > > What clearly hasn't happened is any proponent of this RFC actua

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi all, I've already written a blog on the topic, so needless to say I have no objections personally to seeing a Code of Conduct. Reading the current draft RFC, I did see a few potential issues which I'd like to raise on the specific text used insofar as it's starting point. 1. It should

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

David, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:05 PM, David Zuelke wrote: > On 11.01.2016, at 12:31, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > >> Actually, asking for proof and denying are the same thing. If they >> weren't, then why would you be asking for proof unless you believed it

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Le 11/01/2016 23:55, Anthony Ferrara a écrit : There are two prime reasons people may avoid internals (at least related to this discussion). 1. Don't want to deal with the aggressive tone of the list 2. Don't want to expose themselves to targeted aggression/negativity If we want to deal with

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> > That's because nobody does that. Instead, the question is whether the > > specific proposal is helpful to fix specific issues. The conversation > > goes like this: > > > > A: here's solution X! > > B: for what? > > A: for problem Y > > B: but do we have problem Y? Also, X does not seem to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 11.01.2016, at 12:31, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Actually, asking for proof and denying are the same thing. If they > weren't, then why would you be asking for proof unless you believed it > didn't happen? They are not the same thing. If you make a claim, then the onus of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 11/01/16 22:55, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > There are two prime reasons people may avoid internals (at least > related to this discussion). > > 1. Don't want to deal with the aggressive tone of the list > 2. Don't want to expose themselves to targeted aggression/negativity Sorry, but this is

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > I don't think that's a fair characterization of this discussion. Some > people have questioned what this is a solution to, but most haven't. > Some have questioned if we have a problem, but most haven't. Again, "a problem". You and Pierre are talking as if there's specific problem you have

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > Even without that, though, it's clear we *do* have more serious issues > > than just "rudeness". When a major contributor is getting death-threats > > over an RFC, *there is a problem*. That they're

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > Even without that, though, it's clear we *do* have more serious issues > than just "rudeness". When a major contributor is getting death-threats > over an RFC, *there is a problem*. That they're happening off-list > doesn't change the fact that *that is a problem*. OK, so to evaluate

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

First and foremost, as PHP is an open source project and the lifeblood of any open source project is accepting that people do come (and go). I've been watching internals for a few years and that is clearly obvious. So it seems silly for any open source project to argue against newcomers. On

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 19:40, François Laupretre wrote: > > If we want to deal with the reasons why people avoid internals, the let's go > and analyze the problem first ? I will start asking whether we really want to > attract newcomers. The question may sound ridiculous but

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Stas, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> I fail to understand how one can think that the CoC could be about >> censorship (which is basically what this comment says). > > I can explain you that very easily: there are known instances where

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 2:48 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > So, we have a situation where we have a mismatch between a problem and a > solution, and that is what the misunderstanding is based on. You and > several other people try to prove something we already agree about

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

I question if there is a way to keep all communication in PHP Internals on PHP Internals, which would minimize the risk of someone reaching someone outside of PHP Internals. By that I mean, as it stands now, everyone's email is public and someone meaning to cause or threaten harm could personally

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Larry, Thanks for your detailed letter. I think that I'm not that far off from your position, but clearly, there are some differences of opinion that lead us to different conclusions. Given the length of your email, I'm going to be very^H^H^H^H selective in what I respond to. > I'm inclined

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no > rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like they enforce anything. > If someone wanted to send a death threat to another developer about PHP

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's > > a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:00, Brandon Savage > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara > > wrote: > > > >> The CoC doesn't try to enforce

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's > a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project OK, that is clear enough, but I see an issue here - we'd be applying an pressure

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and > > calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, > > and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly say

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Stas, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and >> calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, >> and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:00, Brandon Savage wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: > >> The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside >> of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project >> members

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside > of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project > members wherever they represent the project. > So just to be clear, your intent is for the CoC to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Brandon, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Brandon Savage wrote: >> >> At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what >> great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no >> rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 9:11 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > Brandon, > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Brandon Savage > > wrote: > >> And that to me is the crux of the issue. When it comes to making >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and > calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful, > and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly say "whatever" > if it happens. OK, so what should we do instead? So far my calls to apply some

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 11, 2016 8:47 PM, "Brandon Savage" wrote: > > > > > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group managed resource, so no > > rules! Twitter, ha, no rules! Reddit? LOL like they

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:52 PM Pierre Joye wrote: > On Jan 11, 2016 8:47 PM, "Brandon Savage" > wrote: > > > > > > > > At the same time, though, if someone is being maliciously hostile what > > > great cover! A private email is not a PHP-Group

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > I fail to understand how one can think that the CoC could be about > censorship (which is basically what this comment says). I can explain you that very easily: there are known instances where CoCs were used and even more instances where there were attempts to use CoCs and CoC-like

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 01/09/2016 10:03 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! I was not hesitant (or, let's maybe call it "intentionally procrastinating") to post on this topic because I felt unsafe on this list or in the general realm of the PHP community; I simply was in no mood to deal with a mob of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 10/01/16 04:20, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> currently 207 messages long. Out of that 207, the vast majority *FROM >> > EITHER SIDE* is either rhetoric, hyperbole or pure argument. > What's wrong with rhetoric and argument? That's how discussion is made. > Hyperbole, of course, can be toned

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 10, 2016, at 11:03, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > Hi Anthony, > >> On Jan 9, 2016, at 21:48, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > [Regarding supported of the COC as presented] > >> We've been trying to discuss logic. > > I think "logic" would apply

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi Anthony, > On Jan 9, 2016, at 21:48, Anthony Ferrara wrote: [Regarding supported of the COC as presented] > We've been trying to discuss logic. I think "logic" would apply itself to more measurements of observable reality. For example: - Collect observations and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 9, 2016, at 19:39, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Bishop Bettini wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >>> On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye wrote: > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over aggressive You are wrong. At best, it is "your opinion" only. I stand by every comment I made, and will reiterate them yet again: the COC document as presented is a fascist

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over aggressive > > You are wrong. At best, it is "your opinion" only. I am not wrong nor right. You

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> > On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

All, Having read all of the RFCs proposed to date, as well as the discussions around this topic, I have some questions that have yet to be answered, and that I would like to try and understand the answers to. Some quick background: I may program for a living, but I hold a degree in political

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 9, 2016 10:43 PM, "Pierre Joye" wrote: > > > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over aggressive > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > > On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 9, 2016 12:38 PM, "Bishop Bettini" wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >> > >> > On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones"

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

als > <internals@lists.php.net>; Stas Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones <pmjone...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2016, at

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Hey all, > > I have created a new RFC for the PHP Project to adopt the Contributor > Covenant as the official Code of Conduct for the project > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adopt-code-of-conduct > > Let me know what you

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 08.01.2016, at 07:09, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > I think if the current RFC went to vote, it would come very close to > passing as-is. But as I've said before, I don't think it's anywhere > near ready to vote on. Larry has started a discussion with the people > behind

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

All, > I was not hesitant (or, let's maybe call it "intentionally procrastinating") > to post on this topic because I felt unsafe on this list or in the general > realm of the PHP community; I simply was in no mood to deal with a mob of > self-proclaimed-or-not "Social Justice Warriors" and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 09.01.2016, at 19:48, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > All, > >> I was not hesitant (or, let's maybe call it "intentionally procrastinating") >> to post on this topic because I felt unsafe on this list or in the general >> realm of the PHP community; I simply was in no mood

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > I was not hesitant (or, let's maybe call it "intentionally > procrastinating") to post on this topic because I felt unsafe on this > list or in the general realm of the PHP community; I simply was in no > mood to deal with a mob of self-proclaimed-or-not "Social Justice > Warriors" and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 10, 2016 10:19 AM, "David Zuelke" wrote: > > +1 to all the points below; pretty much my concerns and thoughts exactly. I am bit confused by your last replies. On one side you said you don't feel comfortable and on the other you agree to say that it is not a toxic

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Bishop Bettini wrote: > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >> > >> > On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones"

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 06.01.2016, at 12:31, Rowan Collins wrote: > > On 6 January 2016 19:42:29 GMT, Stanislav Malyshev > wrote: >> I love it how The Law spends so much text and yet leaves so much >> unspecified and open to interpretation. > > Welcome to Common Law.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 08.01.2016, at 07:47, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > I don't think anything in this thread warrants the term "attack" or > "harassment". While I strongly don't agree with the tone being used > nor the tactics being used, I don't think they warrant any sort of CoC > violation.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 06.01.2016, at 07:21, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > Stas, > > I wanted to avoid citing personal examples for personal reasons. But > since you refuse to read between the lines, here it goes: > > I have received no less than 4 direct threats of violence that were > directly

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

+1 to all the points below; pretty much my concerns and thoughts exactly. > On 08.01.2016, at 08:30, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >> We've seen time and time again that the court of public opinion is a >> horrific >> judge for these style issues. > > This sentence has me worried in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 06.01.2016, at 03:58, Kevin Smith wrote: > >> You state this like some kind of self-evident truth. Understand that not >> everybody agrees with you, and scorn is not generally something that wins >> people round to your argument. > > If a code of conduct so broad and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

(Thank you for this write-up, Brandon. It's good to hear an opinion from someone who's a bit closer to that "field". I'll ignore netiquette and top-post because it feels like a good point to pick up from and share my general thoughts on this) Personally, I don't disagree with the idea of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > Aside from Phil Sturgeon (who used unacceptably harsh language), the > people who support this have been exceedingly reasonable. We've been I could bring some choice quotes (not only from Phil) which nobody would call reasonable, but that's not the point. I don't want to have a contest of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield wrote: > > On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: >>> >>> Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to >>> make fair

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: > > > > Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust > to make fair decisions (NOT that we would always agree

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 11:51, Ryan Pallas wrote: > > > > I would prefer to see the team picked for the next occurence immediately > after one happens. > > (/me ponders) > > That leads to an

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 11:51, Ryan Pallas wrote: > > I would prefer to see the team picked for the next occurence immediately > after one happens. (/me ponders) That leads to an interesting hypothetical situation: if you know in advance that there's a particular team in

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> -Original Message- > From: Paul M. Jones [mailto:pmjone...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 7:28 PM > To: Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> > Cc: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

internals@lists.php.net >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct >> >> >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> > wrote: >>> >>> Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield wrote: On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 13:50, Larry Garfield wrote: > > On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >>> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield wrote: >>> >>> On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 13:50, Larry Garfield wrote: > > > > On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >>> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield > wrote: > >>> > >>>

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> -Original Message- > From: Larry Garfield [mailto:la...@garfieldtech.com] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 9:51 PM > To: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >> O

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to make fair decisions (NOT that we would always agree with, but that are fair) that don't fall too far

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Keith, On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:38 AM, D Keith Casey wrote: > On 1/7/16 11:52 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: >> >> On 01/07/2016 10:08 PM, Brian Moon wrote: Why not? The harassment has been nullified. >>> >>> I agree with your position on most of this, Paul.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Let's look at this from the perspective of a conflict mediation standpoint On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:55 AM Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Keith, > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:38 AM, D Keith Casey > wrote: > > On 1/7/16 11:52 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: > > Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to > make fair decisions (NOT that we would always agree with, but that are fair) > that don't fall too far into "thought policing", in *any*

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 1/8/16 1:20 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! And yes, I am aware that a large part of the concern is the definition of "malicious jackass who hurts people" and "hostile, insulting storm". Not only that. But that even if we have the definition, nobody walks around with a convenient label

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Anthony, > On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:53 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > Keith, > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:38 AM, D Keith Casey > wrote: >> >> - If so, do his personal attacks using sexualized terms constitute a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 22:08, Brian Moon wrote: > >> Why not? The harassment has been nullified. > > I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and > thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It > becomes an arms race to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > And then Phil Sturgeon else used a sexualized term to insult Paul to his > ~16k followers but didn't name him: https://archive.is/oeekT I think that is a clear example of something that would be prohibited by CoC. We do not need to split hairs here about what each exact word means, it is

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:53, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > The fact that many in this thread are suggesting that "it didn't happen on > list, so we shouldn't care" is extremely narrow. To be clear, my position is not "we shouldn't care". For the record: care all you like,

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:28 PM Paul M. Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote: > > > > Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust > to make fair decisions (NOT that we would always agree with,

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 1/7/16 11:52 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: On 01/07/2016 10:08 PM, Brian Moon wrote: Why not? The harassment has been nullified. I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It becomes an arms race

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > It is not what I am referring to but harassment, insults, attacks or > similar events. I do not think we need to discuss endlessly that we Proposed CoC says "insulting/derogatory comments" and "[o]ther unethical or unprofessional conduct". And that can be (and in some cases has been)

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

ea Faulds <a...@ajf.me>; > internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct > > All, > > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:43 PM, François Laupretre <franc...@php.net> > wrote: > > Le 06/01/2016 20:38, Ryan Pallas a écrit : >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> Why not? The harassment has been nullified. I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It becomes an arms race to try and block someone. Brian. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > Hi all, > > As I have stated previously, I find the Contributor Covenant text > objectionable, in that it couples person, project, and politics, so that the > person becomes answerable to the project for their

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: > > If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, > insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this person either > abandon an idea, RFC or even to force this person to leave the > project, the

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: > >> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment, >> insults, personal attacks, etc) trying to make this person either >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 17:14, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > If somebody harasses the other person on Twitter, how exactly banning > this person from internals list is going to make that stop? It doesn't. What it means is the other person can open their PHP-DEV email folder

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 11:25, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > > What it means is the other person can open their PHP-DEV email folder > and know that there's not going to be any subtle crap from the person > that is harassing waiting for them when they want to contribute to > PHP.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> Saying that we "do not care" because it does not happen inside php.net > > would be very hypocrite and makes the CoC totally useless. Recognizing that it is irresponsible (and indeed impossible) for an official PHP body to try to control behavior that takes place outside the

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:37, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >> >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote: >>> >>> If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 16:50, Kevin Smith wrote: > > Would an RFC to ban that person from official channels not suffice here? > You're missing the basic point. If someone makes a complaint with a complaints process that handles everything in the open, i.e. with your suggestion

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 01/07/2016 10:08 PM, Brian Moon wrote: Why not? The harassment has been nullified. I agree with your position on most of this, Paul. However, free email, and thus, Twitter and other social media accounts are nearly unlimited. It becomes an arms race to try and block someone. Brian.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > A code of conduct without an enforcement mechanism is useless. It's very > nice to be able to say that we don't condone harassment or abuse, or > that personal attacks or publishing personal information are not > acceptable, but if we can't enforce it, then it falls down the moment But we

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

Hi! > And yes, I am aware that a large part of the concern is the definition > of "malicious jackass who hurts people" and "hostile, insulting storm". Not only that. But that even if we have the definition, nobody walks around with a convenient label of "malicious jackass who hurts people" on

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On 7 January 2016 at 20:12, Paul M. Jones wrote: > > If the activity in question rises to the level of filing a petition for *and > being granted* a restraining order, *then and only then* might the project > have some responsibility to help enforce that order, since the

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > > And none of those caveats exist in the definition you provided. > > Hmmm. Which one did you read? > > "the act of systematic and/or

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:34 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> >> On Jan 8, 2016 3:14 AM, "Chase Peeler" wrote: >> >> > >> > And none of those caveats exist in the definition you

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

On Jan 8, 2016 3:12 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:51, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > > It is not. To me to distinguish harassment vs hot discussions (public or private) is part of common sense and I trust us to have this common

  1   2   3   >