> > So though I've defended recruiters here before, and posted job ads myself, > I think we should consider the possibility that all that's needed is to not > allow job ads (or not allow recruiters if you like -- but I think > simplicity is a virtue here). Then rogue job ads can be responded to on > that strictly technical basis, and there will be fewer ads to cause strife > in the first place.
I agree, even thought this wouldn't solve the root cause, at least it would mitigate the issue a bit. On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:14 PM, John Lee <j...@pobox.com> wrote: > Having been on this list since 2004 I *think* I'm right in saying that > there have never been sharp words on any subject EXCEPT recruiters. > > So though I've defended recruiters here before, and posted job ads myself, > I think we should consider the possibility that all that's needed is to not > allow job ads (or not allow recruiters if you like -- but I think > simplicity is a virtue here). Then rogue job ads can be responded to on > that strictly technical basis, and there will be fewer ads to cause strife > in the first place. > > On Wed, 7 Dec 2016, Marcelo Elias Del Valle wrote: > > Hello, >> >> This is my first message to this list and I am sad the first message is >> not >> about python... But as you're talking about code of conduct, I would like >> to suggest something that has worked very well for me in other groups I >> participate. >> Personally, I don't like CoC much, because it's easy to turn it >> bureaucracy >> and make people not comfortable in giving their opinions, which is not >> usually what we desire. Absence of rules, though, is always bad. >> > _______________________________________________ > python-uk mailing list > python-uk@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >
_______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
