On 2014-11-26, Volker Braun <vbraun.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > ------=_Part_1461_774968532.1417015681893 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="----=_Part_1462_407798269.1417015681894" > > ------=_Part_1462_407798269.1417015681894 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 2:41:32 PM UTC, vdelecroix wrote: >> >> I would have started any official text by "Anybody >> is welcome to contribute" or something like that. > > > That sounds like a mission statement, not like a code of conduct. > > Really, much of the 2-week discussion was just cultural confusion about > what a code of conduct is. Mostly from the non-Americans who have never > seen such a thing. To the contary, I have seen way too much of this shit in my youth, FYI. "Laws of the pioneers of the Soviet Union", "Moral codex of a young builder of Communism", etc etc ad nauseum... > And I understand your culture shock in that regard. I have had very unhappy memories vividly recalled by this thread. I have better things to do than to manage this, really...
> On > the other side were people that are quite familiar with codes of conducts > in other organizations and were just as rightfully confused that we can't > even agree on being nice to each other. > > Also, during the lengthy discussion there were very few concrete actionable > suggestions for changes. You were one of the few honorable exceptions when > you put the text on the wiki to make changes. But so far there has only > been one edit by yourself, so I think its fair to say that this did not > gather much momentum. Still I would be happy if people can come up with > relevant changes, but please keep it on the topic of a code of conduct. > > Even Volker was not able to >> vote because of his teaching. >> > > I could have voted, but I didn't. Mostly because I think that the whole > discussion was more useful than a text tucked away on the web page when it > comes to reminding everyone to stay civil. So I would have counted either > outcome as a win... > > You can not state "be nice" as an order. The only thing which makes >> sense is to say "welcome". > > > Then why is it called Kant's categorial imperative, should we rephrase it > as Kant's categorial suggestion? Its just an English language thing. If > you want to argue about it please include other codes of conduct and > explain why they are wrong, too. > > > -- 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.
