Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90520
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain heroku.com designates 74.125.82.42 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nFfgaFXxEE8waUAGPWJ_ScMR5eCVhbgY45UDjYjjZyezA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 14:05:47 -0800
Cc: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>,
 Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>,
 Brandon Savage <brandon@brandonsavage.net>,
 Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>,
 PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <D040B20F-320E-4564-97AA-7CF6739DCC95@heroku.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> <CAEZPtU572=7gHrVTuvSOPGWPmEHEE6ezWJxxanQK06goJ9-rYw@mail.gmail.com> <56940D47.3060206@gmail.com> <CAAyV7nFfgaFXxEE8waUAGPWJ_ScMR5eCVhbgY45UDjYjjZyezA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: dz@heroku.com (David Zuelke)

On 11.01.2016, at 12:31, Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually, asking for proof and denying are the same thing. If they
> weren't, then why would you be asking for proof unless you believed it
> didn't happen?

They are not the same thing. If you make a claim, then the onus of proof =
is on you, and you cannot simply turn that reasonable request against =
them by then implying they're denying. Otherwise, why have proof for =
anything at all?

To me, this begs the question: would you handle incidents covered by the =
CoC in a similar way, with that same attitude? An accuser claims =
something, and asking for proof will be interpreted as denial?

By extension, will a third party asking for proof for an incident be =
subject to kafkatrapping - "the fact that you're doubting X happened =
means you're also guilty of X"? That one has happened to me before on =
twitter. Didn't stick because of the ridiculousness, but maybe the =
conjured mob was simply not large enough to spark sufficient outrage.

I'm pretty uncomfortable that you as the person "in charge" of this RFC =
hold such biased views. If you can't see that asking for proof and =
denial are different things then that IMO disqualifies you for that =
role.

The same applies to your claims of threats of violence. It's fine if you =
don't want to provide details, but then you can't bring those cases up. =
It's legitimate for others here to ask you for evidence if you do bring =
it up. I understand that we're all different personalities and you're =
maybe more wired in that direction (mentioning something in passing), =
but you need to understand that once a claim is out there, it's up to =
you to back it up. If you then refuse to, it raises doubts, and =
rightfully so.

Otherwise, we "just have to take your word for it", and that's exactly =
the thing many here are afraid of when it comes to this RFC - that in =
the future, anyone can pull accusations out of their hats, and the =
accusation is enough, because "why would you be making that accusation =
if it didn't happen" (please compare that sentence to the quoted section =
at the beginning of this message to understand why it is relevant.

David