(sorry for the very very late reply -- catching up on email) On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 01:37:57PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > >>>>> "Iustin" == Iustin Pop <ius...@debian.org> writes: > Iustin> I also wonder why the diversity statement is not integrated > Iustin> into the CoC directly - maybe, for example, as an extension > Iustin> of (1) Be respectful; right now (1) seems to imply just > Iustin> polite language, but not respecting other people's views. > > I don't know why that didn't happen at the beginning.
The very simple answer to that is that the diversity statement was written before the code of conduct, and that both were created through a GR. Overriding the diversity statement would have made the CoC GR vote be much more complicated than it needed to be, so I didn't go there. While not incorrect, it is also not the whole answer. The somewhat longer version is that in my mind, the diversity statement and the code of conduct serve different purposes. The diversity statement is a statement of principle; it states "we welcome you", without saying how, or what will happen if people make others feel unwelcome. The Code of Conduct, on the other hand, does provide a number of guidelines on how to behave, and links to another document that has more of those. It is therefore more of a practical document than an intention statement, like the diversity statement is. (not that I think an "intention statement" is a bad thing -- it has its place, and the diversity statement serves us well -- but its purpose is not the same as that of the code of conduct) > What I do know is that changing it now would require a GR. > I personally would not choose to start that process at this time. I > don't think the benefit is worth the cost. I agree, and for reasons explained above, I would recommend against doing so. -- To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
