Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90237 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14287 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2016 21:07:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Jan 2016 21:07:31 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 2.218.134.247 unknown Received: from [2.218.134.247] ([2.218.134.247:4442] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 39/21-21755-2128D865 for ; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:07:31 -0500 Message-ID: <39.21.21755.2128D865@pb1.pair.com> To: internals@lists.php.net References: <66E04ACF-7363-4E47-BFFD-E380E5B1EA23@gmail.com> <6D.39.21755.3576D865@pb1.pair.com> <1AD1B991-A3E5-4D6C-A532-5F0FCCC2ED61@gmail.com> <568D7C5D.9020405@php.net> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 21:07:24 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <568D7C5D.9020405@php.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Posted-By: 2.218.134.247 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) Hi François, François Laupretre wrote: > Le 06/01/2016 20:38, Ryan Pallas a écrit : >> >> I agree, a conflict resolution document *and team* seems infinitely >> better. >> This team's job is to resolve things quietly and without further >> incident, >> however if action may be required - its an open vote (as previously >> suggested). > > Agreed. 'Don't be evil' is sufficient as a CoC. Anything we add to this > will be redundant, ambiguous, and subject to interpretations. 'Don't be evil' is not sufficient because 'evil' is incredibly subjective. Is harassment evil? Are personal attacks evil? Is trolling evil? Is publishing someone's personal information evil? Is using sexualised language evil? Worse, 'Evil' is particularly bad because it concerns morality; personally, I'm not sure if I'd consider everything convered by a code of conduct as necessarily evil. And the job of a code of conduct *is not to act as a moral code*. A code of conduct states what is socially acceptable, not what will send you to hell. Not even the law has that job. And that's just concerning how something like 'don't be evil' can be too narow in scope. It can also be far too broad: evil, of course, extends beyond the realm of the PHP community. And there are perhaps 'evil' actions which we would consider acceptable behaviour. In some religions the consumption of alcohol is forbidden, and yet consuming alcohol as a member of the PHP community is completely acceptable, indeed some PHP meetups take place in establishments dedicated to serving alcoholic drinks. An actual code of conduct, like the Contributor Covenant, is much more useful. Though, as with any code, it does contain ambiguities, it is clearer as to what is unacceptable. It doesn't leave everything open to the multitude of possible interpretations of a single concept. Furthermore, I would posit that redundancy is subjective and not necessarily bad. While you might consider everything in a hypothetical code of conduct to be redundant if the first line is just "Don't be evil", as I have already discussed, other people may not consider all of the following behaviours to be covered by that first line. Replacing the code of conduct with those three words wouldn't leave it less open to interpretation. It would make there be no code at all, and the only enforcement be that of the personal perceptions of the moderators as to what 'evil' constitutes. Thanks. -- Andrea Faulds https://ajf.me/