Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90305 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 2590 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2016 19:44:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Jan 2016 19:44:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pmjones88@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pmjones88@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.172 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pmjones88@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.172 mail-yk0-f172.google.com Received: from [209.85.160.172] ([209.85.160.172:35497] helo=mail-yk0-f172.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 4C/80-21405-B10CE865 for ; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:44:27 -0500 Received: by mail-yk0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x67so340708434ykd.2 for ; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:44:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=2boaYBkbsFhog7TPMAfvSf3X3bDEG0ufcNiPFP8adwo=; b=TidyHyroL+ELB42G1eSOG6c3biLu3cEnoxpKxF4Ami+WBwCKFOE3qbJJYxrHI8uMmd OAztBubP7b97gqTD5DEttZejpCiOpNNt7razOT82+DNx2yosU0nZ7DjufqduhwrkHiks 0HNBnUzLWBF8e8rsqiHwaW5Jb2mNrW0JDqbM2FnMEvdr6jaxUv5wa8UKmN3XDBzgFYR5 n7DUbfrnuYoPrhPYzbrzOKLTRau10M6gXQXcRdol18jV+fbCCoZZjtk+bPFA3eaGhLlR re/GJYvmL+l8jbSQVeRtYv90/Cgw6ZCOsNQmGXdvFOGuCZ35hbgzY+FaWJB4nRzFvWxW m/8A== X-Received: by 10.129.75.145 with SMTP id y139mr77012416ywa.32.1452195864830; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2602:306:cecb:ae30:7cfc:fbfa:1163:db7e? ([2602:306:cecb:ae30:7cfc:fbfa:1163:db7e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p63sm85807492ywf.8.2016.01.07.11.44.24 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:44:24 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.1 \(3096.5\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 13:44:23 -0600 Cc: Anthony Ferrara , PHP internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: 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> <1e6a13607a3a1c8b20a4649f8a5ef767@mail.gmail.com> <3AB5AA82-4F17-40C3-B8B5-33697A8DBEC2@gmail.com> <0AFAA09D-0933-4C8D-91A4-307F9916D3AD@gmail.com> <2328961D-4B28-4EE7-8DDD-AD1F1A0A3617@gmail.com> <87E54FB2-7294-4CED-B969-46B086903E18@gmail.com> To: Pierre Joye X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3096.5) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct From: pmjones88@gmail.com ("Paul M. Jones") > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:39, Pierre Joye wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Jan 8, 2016 2:27 AM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:25, Pierre Joye = wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2016 2:21 AM, "Paul M. Jones" = wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2016, at 13:15, Pierre Joye = wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 8, 2016 1:58 AM, "Paul M. Jones" = wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> I notice you did not answer my question. I'll ask again: when = you say "proven guilty" what exactly do you mean? > > > > > > > > > > I see you are going to nitpick here. So let clarify it. > > > > > > > > When we're talking about banning people as a result of their = actions, we'd better be clear on the details, don't you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If there is a clear set of evidences that someone harassed, = insulted, attacked another person then it fits this definition. > > > > > > > > What to you would be "a clear set of evidences"? (If you have = examples of actual occurrences, that would be better than building = hypotheticals, and probably easier.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please keep in mind than harassment, attacks or insults have = nothing to do with opinions. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, too many people confuse "argument" with = "harassment", and "disagreement" with "attacks", and "observations" as = "insults." So I'd like to hear first what "clear evidence" means to = you. > > > > > > This is what I mean by nitpicking. I am sure you perfectly = understand my point as well as what I would consider as bad. Just in = case, an opiniated hot discussion is not. I would appreciate a clear = answer as well from your side and little less nitpicking. > > > > To give clear answers, I need clear statements. For example, if a = person *claims* harassment, what to you would be *evidence* of that = harassment? This is not nitpicking; this is defining the terms of the = conversation. If you are unable to clarify, that's cool, just say so. >=20 > I think you are playing. I have never been more serious. This RFC, if passed, is going to have = wide-ranging consequences, and if the terms in it are so vague as to = give open-ended powers to those charged with enforcing it, I think = that's a dangerous thing. So again: What to you would be "a clear set of evidences"? (If you have = examples of actual occurrences, that would be better than building = hypotheticals, and probably easier.) And again, if you are unable to clarify this, I'm OK with that. I get = that it's messy. We can then work together to build up a definition. I = presume that you want to collaborate to come up with the best possible = RFC, yes? And if not, why not? --=20 Paul M. Jones pmjones88@gmail.com http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php