couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Cottlehuber <...@jsonified.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Code of conduct - edit of the point 2
Date Sun, 27 Jul 2014 09:06:41 GMT
 
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>  
> > Empathy is the capacity to recognise emotions of others.
> >
>  
> This is not a capacity. Just a feeling that you are able to. A behaviorist
> assumption by the way.

Empathy could also be defined as the action of attempting to understand the  
perspective of the other person. Presumably this then results in a more effective
discussion. I’m not sure what behaviourist is, but I will read up on it later.

I’m reasonably comfortable assuming that empathy, however you choose to define it,
is not an English language construct. In the few languages I’m familiar with, it
seems quite consistent in usage, enough for us to use it in this CoC.

> > I'd like for this community to be the baseline of interaction: looking out  
> > for each other in order to avoid misunderstanding and help to resolve  
> > conflict amicably.  

+1 an admirable objective.

> > One can very well be emphatic towards total strangers. For example, notice  
> > how we treat people differently, when they post here for the first time. We  
> > take into account, that they haven't been accustomed to how things work  
> > around here. That's empathy in action, unambiguously.  
> >  
> > The fact that empathy is harder to practice in a written, electronic  
> > medium makes me want to put empathy front and centre into culture even more.  
> >  
> > I like your point about trust and best intentions and that's worth  
> > capturing, if we don't have it yet, but that's a separate point and can't  
> > replace empathy.  

I wholeheartedly concur, +10^23.

> I don't see why you have to use the term "empathy" and why it has to be  
> there. Why do you want to use a psychological term only use by a group of  
> the population in a code of **conduct**? Last proposal I did define what  
> you seems to expect from the others without either using the term of trust  
> or empathy. I don't see any reason about using a vague term known to be  
> conflicting in its resolution. A code of conduct should only be a framework  
> for the community, not a way to transform it in a club.
>  
> - benoit.  

I think we’ve reached the limit on discussing further in this thread. We seem
to have 1 repeated dissenting opinion about the precise usage of empathy, and
about 6 others who are content with the current phrasing.

Either we use alternate wording, or we stick with what we’ve got. Where to next?

—  
Dave Cottlehuber
dch@jsonified.com
Sent from my Couch




Mime
View raw message