Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90507
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5693D1A4.2050208@gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nFbngZ42qzbSFyveH+vsyir9QNtMJq8H=u9VqTBVBv5Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nHrip8Ljxjdi2DiGbcnXxY9JK+pN+LCwYKqsjJNvEyUrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<910b145571b2c3e98338d54c0dd6a981@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nGGJ3-mCZhDcmhcjqgEOMUBQwvA0vVEE67K4Vmot4ep5Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPgLKii-L-TvKLiSYNdcXxmkr60k2_93EE7hc9LSL=3NQwQjRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAESVnVqrXQHpYabkOZvVhbGVUNtQLLS_h=OsnaaQWhEeHWx+uw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nGV4Vawdq67j0eZa4j+R2zM_14-KZpBe_S6JUOc7-9Yfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<0E9E4C89-1800-4000-BD5A-BC81F43BE2FE@gohearsay.com>
	<CAAyV7nEVKqOJWn9Fb7Sa2cAPRBZ-Pu00BOmha4ObGciwPHXiGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<44142A2C-0E7C-4525-880F-7759CD8A502A@heroku.com>
	<5691D820.4080309@gmail.com>
	<56934116.70002@garfieldtech.com>
	<CALuPxdC64svDjOsK4z=gU8OurHDS6H0kFx7Re=G4xMrRxQU9Tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nEQ3GySgPvoDB3Q7+pEXpK5zG0rue7s-VZYzX1j1EiHhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5693D1A4.2050208@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:26:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAyV7nGEUSQ67Ptp_cqL0ZHFiAgs9HnCfjp1CfsO2VATnGY7Og@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara)

Stas,

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Stanislav Malyshev
<smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> least hold ourselves to a level of mutual respect. Going out and
>> calling someone a moron in public is not constructive nor respectful,
>> and IMHO we as a project shouldn't sit back and blindly say "whatever"
>> if it happens.
>
> OK, so what should we do instead? So far my calls to apply some TDD were
> not heard, maybe this time?
>
> Let's consider an example of twitter user drupliconissad. It may be
> genuine individual or a troll, it doesn't matter either way.
> If you read the feed, you can find much more than "moron". Now, had we
> had CoC, what would we do? We don't know who that is, so private
> moderation is out of the question, even if we did - it's not look like a
> personal conflict that can be amicably reconciled. Should we issue a
> proclamation saying "we think some anonymous account on twitter is being
> bad"? Should we ban that person (or group of persons - we have no idea
> either way), which we have no idea who that is, from our list? Any other
> ideas?

This particular case isn't what a CoC would protect. So I think that's
a bit of a red herring. The CoC doesn't try to enforce itself outside
of the scope of project members. Instead, it applies to project
members wherever they represent the project. So unless we learn that
the "drupliconissad" account actually was a internals contributor,
it's beyond the scope of the CoC considering it also happened
off-list.

However, as Ferenc indicates, what Phil Sturgeon has been saying on
twitter would be within the scope of the CoC, since he is a member of
the project and is actively discussing the project and its members in
a project-related context.

Anthony