David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Eh, they do and that is one of the reasons to oppose the >> Code of Conduct. Its draft implicitly alleges that the >> technical spaces currently are a cesspit that is in urgent >> need of someone with a rake while protecting actual offend- >> ers by granting immunity to "neuroatypical" behaviour.
> This is a pretty reasonable presumption regarding technical spaces: if > you *don't* have a code of conduct, it's a reasonable conclusion from > outside that there will be serious unacknowledged problems. > e.g. "You literally cannot pay me to speak without a Code of Conduct" > http://rachelnabors.com/2015/09/01/code-of-conduct/ > This is literally all well-worn discourse territory, but I'm sure if > you both persist you can wear everyone down. Repeating "reasonable" does not replace arguments. There is a lot of conjecture around code of conducts, just like there are a lot of prejudices elsewhere. Even if a belief is held by a significant number of people that does not make it a fact. Tim _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
