----- "Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" <h...@debian.org> wrote:
> Agreed. It will serve no purpose but to put everyone at risk [of > legal > actions] and extra nuisances. We can have a private location with > this data > which only DDs can access for governance purposes, if required (and I > *do not* think it is required at all). I feel we are also at risk when there is a lack of policy and proper documentation. A ban, especially a long term ban on a DD, is a strong statement against the character of a person even when not advertised publicly. In the physical world, it is as if you barred someone from entering a clubhouse. Friends inside will wonder what the person did to deserve the treatment and potentially make up stories. People working with them may lose confidence in any effort they are collaborating on. It is not necessary to put a sign on the door that says "So and so is not allowed" even though that is obviously worse. If the policy for barring entry is understood by everyone in advance then participation in the club is effectively "consent" in the governing policy. This is still true for a policy of "don't upset the list masters or they will throw you out" but such a policy leaves a great deal of personal responsibility on the "behavior police". To me, policy and documentation are a shield that decreases legal risk rather than increasing it. I'd hate to be a football referee if there were no rules. IANAL. I support the CoC GR. I accept the position that the GR represents a codification of status quo rather than the generation of new policy. I would love to see additional clarity around the rules and the record keeping because this policy (the CoC) is definitely going to cause hard feelings at some future date and I think clarity is a guard against that. Russ has expressed quite clearly how process protects us in prickly scenarios. I will vote for the CoC GR in its current form but with the reservations I've noted. I just wanted to get my opinion out there so that I can say "I told you so" when things go terribly wrong. Ha, ha. Just kidding. Still an acceptable email? Too much comedy? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3507416.22421392315930297.javamail.r...@newmail.brainfood.com
