Hi Josh,
I agree with and understand your sentiments. However, you are basically
arguing that since we cannot count on the common sense of the user
community to behave professionally in professional environments, we must
therefore count on the commonsense of TPTB who will enforce a speech and
behavior code. This, in real life, never works out that way in my
experience however well intended and the risks from consequences of a
mistake of enforcement are far greater than a mistake of violation. I
believe strongly that an affirmative policy is more than enough to inject a
good bit of common sense and to provide a referral point to remind someone
who seems to be crossing the line on how to better cooperate with the
community. The potential for abuse is too high for a speech and behavior
code as I believe I have already demonstrated in the one real life example
of its invocation. Not sure what your justification for forgetting this
instance is but I think it's critical evidence against a speech/behavior
code - especially then opening its scope to non-Django related contexts.
Whenever there is any doubt, always side with freedom. If, as you
suggest, these are intended to be guidelines then people who make a simple
mistake can be reminded and act accordingly which benefits everyone with a
simple affirmative policy. If, instead, these are intended as zero
tolerance principles then a small mistake gets overblown into something way
more than it is and the entire community is damaged by it. This is exactly
what a speech and behavior code ends up producing. We have one in place
now. It's been abused once already. I'm not yet arguing for its elimination
but let's certainly not expand it. Finally, I would also point out that the
language of the existing code does not fit my understanding of your
interpretation so am I correct in assuming you would want it clarified and
perhaps softened?
thanx,
-- Ben
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Josh Smeaton <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Ben,
>
> I know you haven't advocated the removal of the CoC (or #84 for that
> matter), but you've questioned speech and behaviour limitations upthread,
> so I thought I would include my thougths of a CoC in general.
>
> Just because the code of conduct hasn't been used for intervention
> (forgetting the one instance you've mentioned for now), it doesn't mean
> that it's not a useful tool to have. I would like to think that common
> sense would prevail, but we've seen instances in similar communities where
> it has not. You should not (IMO) need a CoC to tell you not to tell sexual
> jokes at a conference. The organisers should not need (IMO) a CoC to
> justify intervention.
>
> But certain groups of people feel safer or more included attending events
> where they feel like professional behaviour is encouraged and enforced
> where necessary. Some attendees that may not have a complete idea of what
> constitutes professional behaviour can learn from the CoC. And organisers
> have clear direction (authority) of what constitutes desirable behaviour.
> I, personally, feel that calling out specific negative behaviour is useful
> for the educational aspect. It is clear that some people have, at other
> conferences, not been aware that their behaviour was inappropriate.
> Codifying certain examples of undesirable behaviour seems like a good thing
> to me.
>
> The language of #86 does not introduce new "examples" of positive or
> negative behaviour though. It specifically tries to apply the existing code
> to non-django spaces, so I think that debating the merits of inclusive or
> exclusive behaviour should probably belong to a separate discussion.
>
> Regards,
>
> Josh
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/25aa3758-b4ba-4570-8498-a9bb8e333f33%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/25aa3758-b4ba-4570-8498-a9bb8e333f33%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Chief Systems Architect Proteus Technologies <http://proteus-tech.com>
Chief Fan Biggest Fan Productions <http://biggestfan.net>
Personal blog where I am not your demographic
<http://notyourdemographic.com>.
This email intended solely for those who have received it. If you have
received this email by accident - well lucky you!!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAHN%3D9D4JT-a60JDPaPR2M1T5y98b_v1Lh255UEKrxZqhEwtdBw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
