[Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct

[Alexey Andreyev]

Thank you for your answers, Thiago!

> If we took your argument to the extreme, then why would we need a
Constitution
> if we have judges?

As I said, I'm not against any CoC by default. I just tried to express that
professional judges is not an excuse to not work on a better constitution.
Not sure it is appropriate analogy though. Is CoC is just a light welcome
recommendations that is not going to be used by CoC board at making
desicions? Or is it definite rules that we need to follow?
If it's light enough in terms of CoC board possible actions, why bother
adding controvertial details about discrimination for example?
It's not clear about the stringency of the document for me and how to use
it for now.

> Do you trust our Security mailing list?

Yes, I do. And I'm going to trust CoC board, but I do not want to
legitimate things that could easily be misused against community members
and against CoC board too

> I would rather we not write a text ourselves, but find something we're
comfortable with. That would be an extreme effort whose resources could be
best used elsewhere.
> If the CC is such a hot topic, a magnet because of its author's actions,
let's look at others.

I agree about reusing some working CoC is good idea. Not sure that there's
one yet.

сб, 27 окт. 2018 г. в 0:35, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com>:

> On Friday, 26 October 2018 12:28:42 PDT Alexey Andreyev wrote:
> > > I personally think those situations explain why we need a CoC in the
> >
> > first place and why the judgment on such situations is very subjective,
> > best left to humans, not to a script. And the deliberations should not be
> > in a public forum, like a GitHub issue.
> >
> > If mentioned situations best left to humans, what is current CoC for? If
> > deliberations should be limited, who could have access to it?
>
> The deliberation is left to humans, but the ground rules are written so
> that
> all participants know what is expected of them and to give them the
> reassurance that their grievances will be heard (not that there'll be
> action
> taken).
>
> If we took your argument to the extreme, then why would we need a
> Constitution
> if we have judges?
>
> As for who can have access to it or any other methods of checking their
> power,
> I don't know. Do you trust our Security mailing list? Why wouldn't you
> trust
> the CoC board? How can we add those?
>
> > > Isn't it showing that it's *working*?
> >
> > I guess not, not the current version of the CoC at least. Communities are
> > spending resources instead of working on other tasks. If discussed
> > situations be left to humans in the end with current document, we could
> > just state simple one-liner instead: "be conscious and think about future
> > consequences", -- to minimize CoC problems at least.
> >
> > As I said previously, I agree we should work together on a better
> version.
> > I guess Qt people could do it.
>
> I would rather we not write a text ourselves, but find something we're
> comfortable with. That would be an extreme effort whose resources could be
> best used elsewhere.
>
> If the CC is such a hot topic, a magnet because of its author's actions,
> let's
> look at others.
>
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20181027/855d1704/attachment.html>