Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90397
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain garfieldtech.com from 66.111.4.28 cause and error)
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <BE0EB5B804BC488AAD1344BF9D3B9277@gmail.com>
 <6D.39.21755.3576D865@pb1.pair.com>
 <1AD1B991-A3E5-4D6C-A532-5F0FCCC2ED61@gmail.com>
 <CAObuZdtKyJXVEAtJzvZENf+Da6S+BFCnXaErvmiHJXen9DCDmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <568D7C5D.9020405@php.net>
 <CAAyV7nFYYxZELZhgo_wrhr9u2+Lww1jQAw+3O=fGqLJJdg7GkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e6a13607a3a1c8b20a4649f8a5ef767@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU5BaogkrJ4H9o1x9ENWXOVqnAye8Oh535aTHOefMuJz6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3AB5AA82-4F17-40C3-B8B5-33697A8DBEC2@gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU6T14yr8UN1F0goY=7sme-iKgXLECSL7yiAqFLf_xPchw@mail.gmail.com>
 <FD56BF25-0825-4666-AEF9-06996E59C514@gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU7nNuEQehisOZK3nC4AuafrahQbvLgZOGteR1jt4cWV_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <B1697F0F-883C-4D49-8CB6-4DF152662886@gmail.com>
 <8D90A4F6-4E3E-4283-B8E3-152E4707EF4E@moonspot.net>
 <568F4E81.1020205@garfieldtech.com>
 <2732F2A4-51F7-42CC-A7E7-1EC7B26CDF97@gmail.com>
 <568FFD08.1080104@garfieldtech.com>
 <2718DA23-C14B-427A-9FE8-C86918BAA00C@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5690130A.9050801@garfieldtech.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:50:34 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2718DA23-C14B-427A-9FE8-C86918BAA00C@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: larry@garfieldtech.com (Larry Garfield)

On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to make fair decisions (NOT that we would always agree with, but that are fair) that don't fall too far into "thought policing", in *any* direction?  If not, then the community is already lost beyond all hope and we should all just give up now.  I do not believe that to be the case, at all.
>>> Too long spent in a position of power, and even the most fair can become unfair.
>>>
>>> As I have suggested before: *if* there is to be a response team, let it be randomly selected on per-reported-incident basis from the pool of voters. Then there is no possibility of a charge of continuing bias, and it distributes power among the pool, instead of concentrating it into a few members.
>>>
>>> Proponents of the response team: thoughts?
>> Randomly selected: Absolutely not.  I wouldn't randomly select someone to make Ultimate Decision(tm) on a technical RFC, either. But if a question about, say, a parser bug came up there are absolutely certain people that I would trust with that question more than others, and defer to their analysis/opinion more readily.
> Certain people *you* would trust more than others, but that *others* would not trust more.
>
> Also, this is a social/political realm, and not a technical realm; would you not trust, say, a randomly-selected jury to hear and decide on a case? If not, why not?

As many people, including both you and I, have said, we don't want to 
focus on the "jury" aspect.  Rather, we want to focus on conflict 
resolution and mediation, not on hammer dropping.  And conflict 
resolution and mediation is not even remotely a universal skill. No, I 
would not trust a "select a person at random" as a "defuse a situation" 
role, not even a little.

-- 
--Larry Garfield