Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90910
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56A5DB1D.9040208@gmail.com>
References: <023119E29B154072B09D82ED35C29C36@sharonc67d61d6>
	<56A573C2.4070202@allanmacgregor.com>
	<56A5AD0E.3060701@gmail.com>
	<CAB6YZuwbQ3DZ1K+-Kg8iTx=_GUpdr2jDzeA0bCygQKErJGQNfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<56A5DB1D.9040208@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:36:11 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuw7R-d+hMXHA4RbqU7nr+xEr8PYtW8PMbOKoBZvMOR9kw@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] Re: [RFC] [Re-proposed] Adopt Code of Conduct
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I already submitted it here once, so I'm skipping it - but I do
>> personally like how it says the project is about code.
>
> But it's not. Not only. Code is the result, sure, at least one of, but
> there's a lot of things involved that aren't code.
>

Well, kinda. If people just focused more on writing code and less on
discussing unrelated "clutter" (like someone's beliefs/gender/whatever
or even CoCs in general), then the need for some CoC fades away.

>> Actually, IMHO it is totally enough. The best CoC would be just a CoC
>> with one point:
>> 1. Be polite and behave like an adult.
>
> This is not a code in any meaningful sense except trivial - just as
> "main() {}" is a program in C, but not a useful one except for doing
> nothing. People's notions of "being an adult" differ. Now, it can be
> argued - and was argued - that we don't actually need a code, but then
> discussing details of the code is useless, of course.
>

Yes, I know - and I would like for people to take a step back and
think again whether or not they really need a CoC, and to think about
the reason why they need it - but not just "vague" what-ifs, but
reasons with some real backing, not just empty "buzzwords".

Also, either the CoC is gonna be vague in penalties (vague punishments
and stuff is slippery slope and bad) or will be long and try to define
bad behavior and penalties for them, only making the "trolls" use
loopholes to piss people off and be protected at the same time by CoC.
It's a lose-lose situation, IMHO.

>
>> If somebody harrases you or something, you can always sue him - and
>
> I think we should not disseminate legal advice here :) But without being
> a lawyer I can assure you suing somebody on the internet for trolling is
> not a winning proposition.

Well, I never said trolling, I said harassment - you know, stuff like
cyberstalking, death threats, etc. - the stuff that's really really
harmful and abusive and shouldn't be done. I would guess you can
definitely sue and win for that (or report it to police), depends
probably on the country you live in.

"Trolling" is a vague word with no clear-cut definition. Just kinda
another "buzzword".

Regards
Pavel Kouril