First, apologies for the shambles of formatting this post.
Secondly, having re-read it, I think it was inappropriate to mention Sven in the way I did. I still maintain that there are problems with the code, but I wish to retract the comments about Sven, and I apologise for including them. Peter Kenny From: Pharo-users <pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org> On Behalf Of Peter Kenny Sent: 11 September 2019 22:02 To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct I see no problem with having *a* code of conduct, but there are some worrying aspects of *this* code. Clearly there is a need for generality in any code, but the vagueness of the drafting seems to me to open it up to all sorts of mischief. Consider the paragraph: " Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful." The bits I have bolded mean that the maintainers can apply punitive measures based on what they deem inappropriate. Shouldn't the concept of "due process" come into this? The FAQ section, under the heading "What should I do if I have been accused of violating the code of conduct?", makes no mention of defending ones actions; the only option is to admit guilt and work with the accusers to reform. The inclusion of the words "they deem" opens the way to all sort of subjectivity. Just for one instance, Sven recently thought it inappropriate that John Pfersich mentioned in passing in this list that, besides programming, his hobbies include shooting, which is a legal activity in most countries and an Olympic sport. Others disagreed in the thread, but Sven's message remained "don't do it." If John mentioned it again, could that be a violation of the code? The fact that this particular code, evidently the creation of one person, is accepted by others should not mean it is automatically accepted. There is an obligation to look at it in detail; when I do, I think there are problems. Peter Kenny Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote > On 11 Sep 2019, at 19:07, James Foster <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >> On Sep > 11, 2019, at 8:17 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> >> On 11/09/19 9:14 a. m., Herby Vojčík wrote: >>> I found Contributor > Covenant-derived Code of Conduct was added to >>> Pharo, three months ago. > This is unacceptable under any circumstances. >>> >>> Have fun in your woke > hell. >> >> I would like to have more details about this. For those of us who > don't >> believe in hell, what is the problem of an explicit Code of Conduct? > > > More specifically, what behavior does the Code prohibit that you would > otherwise do? > > For my part, while I might not subscribe to the full > progressive agenda, I wasn’t planning any racial or ethnic slurs (or a > theological discussion of the afterlife—but feel free to ask me privately!), > so don’t find this “woke” agenda too constricting. > > James Indeed. For > those new to the discussion, we are talking about > https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct - which is > quite popular and generally accepted. Sven _____ Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive <http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html> at Nabble.com.
