It had never occurred to me that such a thing would ever be necessary. Any exclusions should be collective decisions not by some oligarchy, and should allow for reinstatement if the perpetrators are contrite.
John On 15 November 2014 08:49, Andrew <andrew.mat...@gmail.com> wrote: > In an ideal world I think that a code of conduct would not be necessary. > Sadly, the world is not ideal. > > I think that SImon's example of what happened with the German translation > project is a great example of why it would be good to have a code of > conduct: some one's comments turned him off working on the project. Simon > said that he thinks that the current system worked perfectly in this > example. I think it failed dismally because Simon stopped working on the > project and, what's worse, he suggests that the project may have been > abandoned. > >> I think you misunderstand the motivation for not wanting any published >> code of conduct. I do *not* want to have an official code of conduct, >> because I *do* want to have civilised manners in our community. > > > Note that in civilised countries there must(!) be a clear distinction > between legislative, judiciary, and executive, a special training is > required in each of these branches, and their actions must not be driven by > personal interest. Having such a separation would, from my perspective, be > the only acceptable way of having an official code of conduct. But I suppose > most developers wouldn't like to quit writing code and studying law instead. > > I would be against having a code of conduct that s used to police now people > post. Rather it should be just a guide. As the whole group is being asked to > vote on, and suggest changes to, the code I don't see this as being driven > by personal interest. > > I disagree with the issue of people not being "trained" to decide what is > acceptable as, first, I think this is part of the current "management > speak": reasonable people can make reasonable decisions and choices. > Secondly, you applaud some of these unqualified people for the support they > gave with the German translation incident. > >> So, I encourage all of us: If an offence happens, then please please take >> care of the person who is offended, but greatly ignore the offender. [my >> emphasis] If ignoring the offender has no effect, then we are likely in a >> situation where "real" law applies. But then it's the department of public >> prosecution. >> > > +1 > > Btw, as Ropbert said, people take their cues from members of the group who > are perceived to be "socially superior" and I certainly consider Simon to be > in this category. I have replied to Simon's post because I think that a code > of conduct is potentially useful and he is the only person who is giving > reasons for not having one. If people like Simon are against having a code > of conduct I think this is significant. On the other hand, I fully endorse > Simon's statement above and I think that it would be quite reasonable to > have it as the official code of conduct. I am being quite serious. After > all, the code of conduct should be an aspiratal statement about how we, as a > group, go about achieving our aims. > > Andrew > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
