On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 06/03/2018 04:08 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
My comments:
1) Reiterate my contention that this is a solution is search of
problem. Still it looks like it is going forward, so see below.
2) "... engaging in behavior that may bring the PostgreSQL project
into disrepute, ..."
This to me is overly broad and pulls in actions that may happen
outside the community. Those if they are actually an issue should be
handled where they occur not here.
This is good point. There are those who would think that one has
performed an action that brings the project into disrepute and a
similar sized bias that suggests that in fact that isn't the case.
This based on the CoC would be judged by the CoC committee.
It is my hope that PostgreSQL.Org -Core chooses members for that
committee that are exceedingly diverse otherwise it is just an echo
chamber for a single ideology and that will destroy this community.
If I may suggest: The committee should be international as well and
include people from around the world. The last thing we want is for
it to be dominated by people from one particular cultural viewpoint.
3) "... members must be sensitive to conduct that may be considered
offensive by fellow members and must refrain from engaging in such
conduct. "
Again overly broad, especially given the hypersensitivity of
people these days. I have found that it is enough to disagree with
someone to have it called offensive. This section should be
removed as proscribed behavior is called out in detail in the
paragraphs above it.
"considered offensive by fellow members"
Is definitely too broad. The problem comes in here:
I might possibly say that "I'm the master in this area" when talking
to someone on a technical subject. In the sense that I'm better at
that particular skill, but some hypersensitive American could get
their knickers in a twist (notice, that in this context, no gender
is implied -- also in using that that expression "get their knickers
in a twist" could offend some snowflake) claiming that I'm
suggesting that whoever
"snowflake", I find that term hilarious others find it highly
offensive. Which is correct?
I agree with both concerns in the above exchange.
This is an economic common project. The goal should be for people to
come together and act civilly. Waging culture war using the code of
conduct itself should be a violation of the code of conduct and this
goes on *all* (not just one or two) sides.
I'm talking to is my slave! I heard of an American university
that doesn't want people to use the term master, like in an MSc,
because of the history of slavery.
The PostgreSQL project already has this problem, note we don't use
the terms Master and Slave in reference to replication anymore.
I've used the expressions "sacrifice a willing virgin" and
"offering my first born to the gods" as ways to ensure success of
resolving a technical issue. The people I say that to, know what
I mean -- and they implicitly know that I'm not seriously
suggesting such conduct. Yet, if I wrote that publicly, it is
conceivable that someone might object!
Yes and that is a problem. We need to have some simple barrier of
acceptance that we are all adults here (or should act like adults).
Knowing your audience is important.
I would point out also that the PostgreSQL community is nice and
mature. At PGConf US I saw what appeared to be two individuals with
red MAGA hats. And yet everyone managed to be civil. We manage to do
better than the US does on the whole in this regard and we should be
proud of ourselves.
Consider a past advertising campaign in Australia to sell
government Bonds. They used two very common hand gestures that
are very Australian. Bond sales dropped. On investigation, they
found the bonds were mainly bought by old Greek people, who found
the gestures obscene. The gestures? Thumbs up, and the okay
gesture formed by touching the thumb with the next finger --
nothing sexually suggestive to most Australians, but traditional
Greeks found them offensive.
Using Australia as an example, my understanding is that the word
c**t is part of nomenclature but in the states the word is taboo and
highly frowned upon.
Again key point that a CoC committee needs to be international and
used to addressing these sorts of issues.
Be very careful in attempting to codify 'correct' behaviour!
Correct. I think one way to look at all of this is, "if you
wouldn't say it to your boss or a client don't say it here". That
too has problems but generally speaking I think it keeps the
restrictions rational.
I will post a more specific set of thoughts here but in general I
think the presumption ought to be that people are trying to work
together. Misunderstanding can happen. But let's try to act in a
collegial and generally respectful way around eachother.
--
Best Regards,
Chris Travers
Database Administrator
Tel: +49 162 9037 210 | Skype: einhverfr | www.adjust.com [1]
Saarbrücker Straße 37a, 10405 Berlin
Links:
------
[1] http://www.adjust.com/
