couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <>
Subject Re: [REQUES] Review proposed bylaws (Was: Re: [DISCUSS] Project bylaws)
Date Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:11:49 GMT
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Benoit Chesneau <>

> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Alexander Shorin" <>
>> > 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:

huxley of course...

>  > 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.

I wanted to say "most of the discussions" , all in the communities i am a
member (even the PSF) or i joined.

- benoit

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