On 5 January 2016 at 16:59, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi! > > > How exactly would you feel about having all of this made explicit to all > > the other PHP devs? Presumably you look up to some of these people - > > I presume you would feel bad. However your example is purely theoretical > and hand-crafted to exactly fit your argument. Yes, I thought it up, hence it's theoretical. If you think that means it hasn't happened countless times along those lines, you need to learn how to google. > It is easy to imagine > theoretical example that found fit practically any argument - including > one that nobody should have any due process at all, since proving any > allegations just hurts the victim again (and you can imagine > unbelievably hurtful circumstances for your theoretical case, since the > only limit is your imagination), so any allegation should be considered > true by mere fact of alleging. Is there any particular reason you feel the need for arguing strawmen? At which point has *anyone* argued for against due process? If you cannot point to any such point, would you mind not assuming them? > I hope that would be going too far for you? > See above. > In practice, there's rarely an allegation that can not be published to > the measure that makes it clear what happened. Unless you've been through abuse and harassment along the lines of http://blog.randi.io/2015/12/31/the-developer-formerly-known-as-freebsdgirl/ I would suggest you stop assuming what it is like. > That does not mean > "verbatim" - in some cases, like publishing private information, > reproducing it verbatim as a proof would be obviously counterproductive, > but there are also obvious way to describe it without reproducing > verbatim, such as "publishing private information". > > See above. > > If you happen to belong to a minority group that often is at the > > receiving end of abuse, what would you think if this was the message > > being sent? Would you expect to be understood by your peers, or would > > I think the message that is being sent is that everybody will be treated > equally and fairly. If somebody has done something bad, it would be > known and the solution would be found, if nothing bad happened, people > can be reasonably assured that they are safe from false accusations. > That applies to majorities, minorities, mediocrities and any other > groups, however one would like to label oneself that particular day. > And you would be wrong - that is not the message being sent. -- <hype> WWW: plphp.dk / plind.dk CV: careers.stackoverflow.com/peterlind LinkedIn: plind Twitter: kafe15 </hype>
