Hi, Up front, I agree the objective of the COC needs to be clearly stated. There is confusion, whether it's here or externally by observers, as to whether this is intended to fix mailing list toxicity (I assume, for now, not) or intended to state the projects intentions should there be a complaint concerning conduct as specifically listed in the COC text per the RFC. It serves neither side when this confusion gets muddled into argument for, against or in-between.
On 20 January 2016 at 22:14, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote: > I'm not going to repeat arguments I've made half a dozen times as to why > having a judicial system must be avoided, and why we must deal exclusively > with desired behaviors and not the 'exception handling' of bad behaviors. I > made my case in the best possible way I can and people who are interested in > it can read it in my previous replies on the topic. Equally important - many > others expressed similar views. Thus far, the only response is a laconic > 'without penalties it's useless', even though we've brought numerous > supporting arguments as why this is simply not true. > > I will repeat that I'm very much in favor of a CoC that includes our positive > core values, and that includes a mediation team in case people are feeling > offended and that can intervene also w/o complaint - but that does not have > any sort of special powers - but is instead exclusively based on good will of > all parties. Even if certain people don't think that's good enough, I don't > believe that anybody would argue that it's BAD - the way many think the > current CoC proposal is. This is precisely why this is the right place to > start. > > Thanks, > > Zeev At a basic level, what exactly is a code of conduct where the only consequence is mediation, where both parties are assumed to have good will, and where the outcome is ??????????. That's the a problem from my perspective. What is the outcome? Does mediation continue indefinitely without results? While the mediation is ongoing for the long haul, will be there be any remediation set to protect a theoretical victim? What is Plan B? Part of the COC is to explicitly limit ad-hoc reactions should things go completely down the gutter by defining something upfront. By extension, any uncertainty of what would happen should Person A complain may act as a deterrent to making such a complaint. It could be anticipated that long drawn out procedures with an unknown ending are in and of themselves stressful (and to both parties to boot). Sincere apologies if this is covered elsewhere. Paddy -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
