Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90225
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.215.45 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: php@golemon.com
In-Reply-To: <568D69EE.4000209@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nFbngZ42qzbSFyveH+vsyir9QNtMJq8H=u9VqTBVBv5Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nGzsuhDSgenmLUjWPYiNfamcqCgvXpM4Sb30VECpTrHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<568C9ED7.30504@gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nEnovW3YqmTjBnhtmAGhKiwYo1tYq_QHDYBgRNKNG61zQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<568D4220.3050309@php.net>
	<CAESVnVob7SweHuHed3yx8uh4hBKtW9+=p9_eX6cgsbGBEAKYfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<568D69EE.4000209@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:45:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CAESVnVqX=FA3PHzhD0_0PQLK9jALZTYgtBnwGvHo4hxW1Uxn9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?= <francois@php.net>, 
	Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm glad you brought this back up, but you seem to have remembered a
>> few things incorrectly.
>
> And this is a good example why information from both sides is essential.
> Everybody has their own story, and human memory is unbelievably faulty
> even with the best of intentions. When some excitement is added up,
> people can honestly believe completely opposite things happened. That is
> why these things are so complicated, and secretiveness would make it
> even more.
>
I agree right up until the second half of the last sentence. :)

Well, I don't disagree with even that per se, but I want to illustrate
a slightly different conclusion from our shared starting point.

Two people in conflict won't necessarily recount the basis of their
conflict because why would they need to? The other person was there,
and they "know what they did"!  Add a third party (say, a response
team of five diverse individuals), and now each side needs to
enumerate what happened, what went wrong, why it's a problem.  Now you
have an impartial observer who can say, "Hey! You guys aren't even on
the same page! Did you notice that?"  That's the role of a response
team, to me.  Not to act as judges, but to act as mediators.

-Sara