> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Prelude [mailto:m...@mprelu.de] > Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 11:31 PM > To: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Re-proposed] Adopt Code of Conduct > > Hi all, > > This is my first mail to the list so please let me know if I do anything > wrong or > if there's a better channel by which to have this kind of discussion. > > I'd like to propose adoption of an alternative code of conduct, the Go > Code: https://golang.org/conduct > > The primary reasons for suggesting this code are: > > - The Go Code focuses primarily on desired behaviours ('be patient', 'be > respectful') and only secondarily on 'avoiding destructive behaviours'.
+1 I think it's sorely missing some 'Please' in there on almost every line, but it's already a whole lot better. I would also include the Golden Rule in there. It's remarkably helpful in my experience. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule) > - The Go Code explicitly notes that it "is not a mechanism for people to > silence others with whom they disagree." - this was a major concern on the > ML, so codifying that this usage will not be accepted in the CoC itself is a > step > in the right direction. +1 > - The Go Code encourages everybody to follow the code in all spaces, but > limits explicit enforcement to Go spaces. +1 > - The Go Code is far more clear in defining prohibited behaviours. It's clearer and a lot more narrower in scope, but still leaves some ambiguity... More on that below. > I've already proposed this idea over at GitHub, but it strikes me that the > correct channel for discussion is PHP internals. The Go CoC is the best I've laid eyes on so far, although it still has me concerned about the punitive parts in it. Even in that context, the good news is that if I understand it correctly, it's completely limited to specific public spaces, so that there's little likelihood of disagreements about the facts - only about their interpretation. Which still has me worried - as it seems that some people's definition of 'bullying' and 'harassment' seem to be very liberally scoped. I can imagine 'demeaning' can also be very much open to interpretation. One thing which isn't clear to me is whether this: "If you conduct yourself in a way that is explicitly forbidden by the CoC, you will be warned and asked to stop. If you do not stop, you will be removed from our community spaces temporarily. Repeated, wilful breaches of the CoC will result in a permanent ban." ... applies to reports, or only to proactive moderation. In other words, whether the response to a report - anonymous or otherwise - can only result in a warning the first time around? Can one only get permabanned after numerous temporary bans and repeated 'offenses'? Last - does anybody know whether this CoC ever got 'battle tested' thus far? Thanks for your work! Zeev
