On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 09:07 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I think forcing everyone to agree to the COC explicity will have a
> number of ill effects and is not desireable.
<snip>
> * It implies that you must agree to this to participate at all in the
> community, which if you are using project resources would make sense,
> but could get expanded beyond our project. (Ie, say someone "signs"
> the COC and then has a poor interaction in another community
> entirely and that community calls them on our COC).
This seems like a fairly unlikely scenario to me (or maybe I'm just not
quite understanding what you are saying here). Has any other community
with a code of conduct had this happen, or is this just a theoretical
scenario?
> So, my strong opinion is that we do not require any explicit signing of
> this, instead we note that it's the case for "everyone who is using
> Fedora project resources".
Ok, I disagree with you on this, Kevin. ;) I think by having the COC
acknowledgment be a part of the CLA change, we benefit by having:
1. All of the community be aware of it since all project members
will need to sign the CLA - i.e. not being lost in the noise of
the mailing lists, and the void of the wiki as so many other
things tend to be.
2. Saying as a community that it is *important* to us as a project
that everyone be treated in a respectful and considerate manner.
Later,
/B
--
Brian Pepple <bpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bpepple
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
