couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [REQUES] Review proposed bylaws (Was: Re: [DISCUSS] Project bylaws)
Date Thu, 05 Jun 2014 08:49:49 GMT
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alexander Shorin" <kxepal@gmail.com>
>
> > Well, mostly all CoC points could be replaced by single sentence: "Be
> polite.":
>
> Being polite is insufficiently rich to describe what we expect from
> people. I also explained why I didn't use polite in a previous thread
> as well (or it might have been IRC, I forget now.)
>
> Proof by counterexample: I have been involved in a private gaming
> community for a long time where the only rule was "be polite" / "don't
> be an asshole". Recently it has been made painfully clear that, to some
> people, being polite means it's OK to be sexist, racist, disparage
> people who don't agree with you, villainize foreigners, and worse that
> I won't bring to bear on this list.
>
> This is even worse when people are "polite" on a mailing list but still
> harbor ill will behind a surface of politeness.
>

This question always raised the question about who is right on naming
thing. Who has more empathy than the others. If you really think that by
laws will solve that you're wrong. However only politeness and respect of
the other will make it possible to discuss between each other. Even though
who disagree with. And this is why it's important to have the respect of
the other made as a rule, a conduct. Empathy is too emotionally charged and
doesn't take in consideration the ego (in its pure definition) of each
parts. It is also creating a new way to control people and reject the
differences by applying a varnish on it, saying that diversity is about
having people at the same level.

There is a lot of literature about it. First by reading "brave new world"
from Huxkley. This paper also summarise it:

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2013/05/20/130520crat_atlarge_bloom?currentPage=all




>
> > P.S. the word "polite" mentioned zero times on code of conduct page.
>
> See above. Saying "be polite" is only the start of a longer
> conversation, one we've been having for years now in various places --
> and one that shows that not everyone has the same level of understanding.
>
> I am -1 on any reductionist single-sentence approach as it
> will simply leave too many loopholes. We should not be placed in a
> position where we must have semantic arguments about what I think
> polite means vs. what you think polite means. Given the difficulties
> CouchDB has had as a community over the years, we must necessarily be
> explicit in the list of what we do and do not tolerate. If that list
> proves insufficient we need to grow it over time.
>
> -Joan
>


A quick note about that but all the discussion in communities about having
by-laws and rules have finished by agreeing in a short version of them.
Most of the time by only using a Coc as a way to define the social
agreement and a list of guidelines aside on how to manage discussions and
other stuff related to the project. Most of the time in the form of an
extensive contributing document.

- benoit

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message