Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90509
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.174 as permitted sender)
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@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>
 <CAAyV7nGEUSQ67Ptp_cqL0ZHFiAgs9HnCfjp1CfsO2VATnGY7Og@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <5693D9F2.7010706@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:36:02 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nGEUSQ67Ptp_cqL0ZHFiAgs9HnCfjp1CfsO2VATnGY7Og@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

> 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

OK, that is clear enough, but I see an issue here - we'd be applying an
pressure that would very quickly modify behavior towards using
sockpuppet accounts. In fact, since we're all smart people here, I think
one instance of enforcement would switch virtually all abuse to
sockpuppets - why risk CoC complaints if you can make a new account with
a witty name and vent freely?
Which would mean if our goal were to reduce abuse, it would fail very
fast. In fact, sockpuppets probably would be more abusive, since
Speaking Truth To Power is so much fun.

Of course, if we have clearly understood limits - such as discussion by
project members in a project-related context - it would not hurt. I'm
afraid it wouldn't help much either.
-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com