On 04/02/2022 10:40, JC Brand wrote:
>> By explicitly stating that this Code of Conduct applies this allows > the XSF to sanction bad behaviour outside of XSF Activities should the > need arise. > > I'm against this statement as written. What someone does in their > private life, unrelated to the XSF and outside of XSF activities has no > bearing on the XSF and the XSF has no justifiable basis to sanction that > person for it. > > Also "bad behaviour" is incredibly broad. What is "bad behaviour"? In > some societies things that are considered bad behaviour are celebrated > in other societies. Social norms change and a sentence such as this > makes this document and its related process open to abuse. > > This makes me think of Brendan Eich who got fired by Mozilla for What about Jacob Appelbaum? In 5 years since the lynching, not one person ever recorded a complaint at a police station. They used the CoC as an alternative to the law. In other words, using the CoC without any official justice process was an act of vigilantism. They used the CoC to spread the defamation from one group to the next like spreading a virus or worm. They spread it all the way to major newspapers like the Washington Post. Is that "safety" or is it a dangerous form of social engineering? Prince Andrew will soon be subject to a trial by jury. Free software developers like Appelbaum are subject to an inferior system, trial by CoC. Why? If somebody genuinely uses an XSF communication platform to promote criminal activity then the existing laws already empower the administrators to remove that content and prevent it coming back. For everything else I feel that online communities need to invest in leadership skills and improving the quality of human relations. Doing those things will go a lot further to advance the cause of the XSF, XMPP and open standards in the wider world. I don't understand why the CoC is being subject to a standards process. It is a social phenomena. In many organizations this type of thing is part of the constitution or a very closely related document. In such cases no member can be censored unless they do something that is obviously over the threshold to justify an expulsion process. Such a process often involves evidence and a right of reply. The CoC undermines the rights of members in such a case and therefore it could be seen as a hack against the organization. Regards, Daniel -- Debian Developer https://danielpocock.com _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
