Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90023
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.195 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <568B1041.1060601@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nFbngZ42qzbSFyveH+vsyir9QNtMJq8H=u9VqTBVBv5Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<568AE803.1080209@gmail.com>
	<568B0C8E.3080206@eliw.com>
	<CAEZPtU6oKG1aHWCb2YUFXPv5bU1E16w__QDZ2HmV-q_KRSceqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<568B1041.1060601@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 07:39:33 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU7dpgh65Nzs61wPmckvPx4sfT4y+8P3fAfJoLyQfb5mxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: Eli <eli@eliw.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> The effort to create and adopt a CoC is minimal and the benefits are
>> huge. It creates, confirms or ensure that the context of the php.net
>> remains a safe for anyone to contribute.
>
> It also provides a way for 5 (or, since CoC mechanisms are not specified
> at all, even 3 assuming CoC decides by majority) people to accuse any
> member of the community of some pretty dark things (without even having
> to provide any substantial proof) and immediately ban them from all the
> community spaces with no ability to explain or counter. I don't think
> this is a good idea, especially when nobody actually thinks we need such
> draconian measures for anything at all that actually happened.

Right, that's one of the parts that need more work and thoughts. My
comment was mainly about the usefulness of a CoC.

-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org