Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90204
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.48 as permitted sender)
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAAyV7nFbngZ42qzbSFyveH+vsyir9QNtMJq8H=u9VqTBVBv5Og@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAyV7nGzsuhDSgenmLUjWPYiNfamcqCgvXpM4Sb30VECpTrHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <568C9ED7.30504@gmail.com>
 <CAAyV7nEnovW3YqmTjBnhtmAGhKiwYo1tYq_QHDYBgRNKNG61zQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <568D4220.3050309@php.net>
Message-ID: <568D477A.9090402@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 16:57:30 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <568D4220.3050309@php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

François Laupretre wrote on 06/01/2016 16:34:
> So, let's analyze what happened when I was accused of 'sabotage' and 
> 'strong-arming'  because I had sent a supposedly offending mail to 
> Sara. In my reply, I published the mail in question so that everyone 
> could judge by itself whether it was offending or not. I'm glad we 
> didn't have a PHP official SJW team because it would have probably 
> denied me the right to publish the message, for confidentiality 
> reasons. So, instead of putting the case in the public space where 
> everyone could see that the accusation was highly exagerated, I would 
> have been judged by 5 people who could have banned me on subjective 
> matters (let's not underestimate cultural differences here). 

Just to play devil's advocate: the flipside of this is that you posting 
the message in the public sphere could be seen as appealing to the crowd 
to back up your interpretation. Just because more people are looking at 
the message, doesn't mean they're looking at it more objectively.

Note that I am absolutely not saying this is what you were doing, just 
extrapolating to a hypothetical situation where the same action could 
have a very different motivation and impact.

I'm also not sure what the solution is, but there's a compromise to be 
made somewhere between "all accusations will be discussed in an 
unaccountable private court" and "all accusations must be discussed in 
full public view".

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]