[Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct

[Konstantin Shegunov]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 4:56 PM Martin Smith <Martin.Smith at qt.io> wrote:

> You just specified a code of conduct. The problem with your code of
> conduct is that it isn't guaranteed to end in resolution.
>

Oh, it is going to end in A resolution, it may not end the way the offended
party may feel just, but that's true also for the proposed text.


> But that isn't the implication.
>

Then I apologize, this is how I interpreted it.

The implication is that a mistreated person can take the actions you have
> specified, and the result can be that the mistreatment, real or not, is not
> resolved.


The proposed text can't guarantee resolution either (see below for a
reductio ad absurdum).

Active contributors who abuse others should be treated the same as inactive
> contributors who abuse others. What would be done would of course depend on
> what the abuser did. I suppose the abuser (active contributor or not) would
> be informed as to what he/she did wrong and would be told to stop doing it.


Say we adopt the CC (basically the proposed text) and imagine that the
abusive party is an employee of the QtC and has committed heinous acts
against a community member. As far as I can tell this is very unlikely, but
humor me for a second. As QtC employees' main work is on the Qt project,
i.e. writing patches, committing features, writing docs and such, how would
is this proposed committee to enforce the CoC? Are they going to plead that
the person is taken out of the project, and wouldn't that mean that,
basically, he/she can't be an employee for the QtC anymore? And to drive it
home, say the head troll had a mental breakdown or something what is the
committee to do? Take over the QtC?

Just as I said before, I'm not against a CoC in principle. I'm against the
CC's text which is quite invasive and badly written. To me KDE's CoC is
much more practical in the case of the Qt project.

Exactly. Without a CoC, we have no laws, so the implication is we don't
> consider any behavior an offense.


Laws are bit more complicated than a statement of how people *should*
behave. There's also separation of power, mandates, enforcement and laws
that control how laws are made. Also there's hierarchy between the laws
themselves in case they are in conflict. I suggest we don't venture into
that. It's not what binds us to this community to begin with.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20181027/ce6f1e6e/attachment.html>