Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90060
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.217.193 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <6A0F14CB-1D3E-41B3-A60C-149A3F3C6201@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>
	<CAEZPtU7dpgh65Nzs61wPmckvPx4sfT4y+8P3fAfJoLyQfb5mxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<568B1DA8.3060908@gmail.com>
	<CADajX4Aur47K4_TnkhScUw6RfA+1LMoDi3JKT9zc0oGJ0EiaAQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<568B210A.9050103@gmail.com>
	<CAAqcDMgJdt-dSg8xzpPz7sObrosCFh49nMOX+4AgqYbzsCDVSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3C2C7EF-66C9-4FD4-B4E7-086C8C362DDF@gmail.com>
	<CAEYWF=7NjuuVRzkxa0bZGeKc4heYWbFCNR59PFVLH96hTyRdUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<10889178-A15C-4B28-85CC-C1E5AB08E952@gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU7oGLr0VScRHcFPuqmgv=+oZuiaKMvptk7iy_AuVZ56wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU6MS2U+3fN6gb59Hu6z65iLm88s+7OEBEXZjqzGDeFNGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<58A18521-05EC-4BC3-AD3E-CD446572088A@gmail.com>
	<CAESVnVrmJr_6nE=9wY6iXn9zLU60Py+1niuTDXOt1fYDvsNw_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<6A0F14CB-1D3E-41B3-A60C-149A3F3C6201@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 20:42:38 -0800
Message-ID: <CAESVnVrRLCT5jyTerkRAvp2uwiFTqbd8nsWwULgB-4qB=Pm1sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Paul M. Jones" <pmjones88@gmail.com>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, Bishop Bettini <bishop@php.net>, 
	Michael Cullum <m@michaelcullum.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Paul M. Jones <pmjones88@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There is supervision, there is oversight.
>> The oversight is this list.  Any council issuing temp-bans without
>> justification will be sanctioned.
>> I'm quite certain that you, among others, will see to that.
>
> If you wouldn't be comfortable with me, and others like me, being the vot=
ing members in the proposed Star Chamber, you should vote against this. Oth=
erwise, it's just you being certain that only "the right-thinking kind of p=
eople" will be making decisions.
>
I love your mind...
I said "I trust you to help keep this process honest", and you
question whether I'd accept arbitrary members.
I would love to learn how you got to that conclusion.

> Frankly the RFC should be turned down out of hand.  Nothing even remotely=
 resembling it is suitable for a free and open society.
>
Formalized rules and due process are terrible for a free and open society?
Again, I love your mind.

-Sara