www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Community Guidelines (was Code of Conduct)
Date Sat, 30 Jun 2007 06:39:37 GMT
Henri - I grok what you are saying.  This isn't a Code of Conduct,
it's a top-level description of our ethos.

Two more inline...

Henri Yandell wrote:
> On 6/28/07, Ted Husted <husted@apache.org> wrote:
>> Some of the ASF Members have indicated a wish to draft a code of
>> conduct. A working draft of a set of  "Community Guidelines" is
>> available on the incubator wiki,
>>
>>  * http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CodeOfConduct
>>
>> Any comments would be very welcome.
> 
> So... I really dislike the BlogHer code of conduct, and what you've
> got too. It's hard to explain why, so now I've ranted out loud to my
> wife for a while, I'll try to see if I've got an explanation.
> 
> I fully agree with the crapness of what led to said code of conduct.
> We shouldn't put up with people acting that way to a member of our
> community (blogging in this case, not apache) unless that's something
> they're signing up for. So biling Hani, sure. But harassing someone
> whose given no reason that they're into such things, no.
> 
> The code of conduct is bad though. It's this thing that supposedly I'm
> meant to be saying "Yes, I'll adhere to this code of conduct", but it
> is far too close to licensing and legal talk. What is a moral right?
> What is an obligation of confidentiality? Afaik I can do anything with
> anything I'm given unless someone indicates its confidential (where my
> employment ndas always seem to define lots as confidential etc). Same
> for much of it. The authors are trying to define "play nice", but all
> they do is create a list of things that if I have to sign up for will
> mean someday that someone is going to accuse me of breaking said rule
> because they interpret the vague words in some other way to me.

confidential is private@.  It's for your eyes only - this goes back to
the fact that individuals participate, not companies, not other orgs.

That needs to be solidified into a code of conduct; you don't represent
your employer, you wear a different hat here.  What you read here (in
private@) stays private, what you find out at work should be private to
your work life.  Folks need to know how to switch, and also wear hats.

> With "play nice", it's obvious that we're all interpreting things, but
> with the attempted code of conduct there's an impression that it is
> definitive and that I'm supposed to understand it all.
> 
> Slight side note. What's the punishment? Are we going to throw people
> out of our community for breaking this? Are we only going to throw
> them out if they sign up?

Hell ya.  Let me state that when various leaks of members@ level and
higher material occured, I was personally read to pen a resolution to
expel the idiot with no respect for the foundation.

We are fortunate that in recent memory, when folks fucked up, they have
admitted it and offered their mea culpas.  That's terrific, I'm glad they
knew (in hindsight) that they did the ASF a disservice.

But I have no problem with a PMC turning off pmc access, commit access,
or even un-subbing an obnoxious participant.  We just had to do this at
the wiki level in httpd.  It happens, solve it, move on.

Bill





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message