From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 250141381F3 for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 13:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 184BEE0D1A; Sun, 26 May 2013 13:11:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FAAE0D12 for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 13:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [62.3.120.142] (helo=NeddySeagoon_SSD) by smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ugaj7-0000MC-No for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 13:11:09 +0000 Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 14:10:50 +0100 From: Roy Bamford Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Code of Conduct To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: (from rich@thefreemanclan.net on Sun May 26 13:40:55 2013) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.13 Message-Id: <1369573869.2793.1@NeddySeagoon_SSD> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-A7Pf+JP5fJ2DrSJmmQcE" X-Originating-Smarthost01-IP: [62.3.120.142] X-Archives-Salt: 3de2a97a-5758-428c-8043-5a1c0e73bd26 X-Archives-Hash: 25baaefc45419aaadaadea48759e25fc --=-A7Pf+JP5fJ2DrSJmmQcE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2013.05.26 13:40, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Roy Bamford=20 > > wrote: > > I would delete everything from "Examples of inappropriate behavior" > to > > the credits at the end. Escalation, punishment and appeal is=20 > already > > covered by devrel documentation. > > >=20 > I suspect that lack of punishment was basically the whole reason the > original CoC was written, and the whole reason the topic came up > again. >=20 > > If you want to say anything about enforcement in the CoC remind > readers > > that everyone is responsible for enforcement. >=20 > That sounds a bit like nobody is responsible for enforcement. The > only thing devs can do to basically do what they're already doing - > having running arguments on the lists. The only way to block > inappropriate behavior is to moderate it. >=20 > Whether we want to do that is up to the community, but the existing > CoC is fine as-is if you don't want to do anything about enforcement, > IMHO. >=20 > Rich >=20 >=20 We have already tried the is responsible for enforcement=20 approach. =20 Even if we encourage everyone to intervene, most won't, for many=20 reasons, so in practice we are back to the again. =20 --=20 Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of elections gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees = --=-A7Pf+JP5fJ2DrSJmmQcE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJRogntAAoJEFZf0zWq3OcJIYwP/iNko+rlWClBh8u4yMzjJ12S JYPdQ0M8gd4tsKFPcGm9wKdqog8Z6YHo9T11afJv+Z3V6kzOVRLliDm/u31SVzes NhFYewcwqto8RnuTXprsrpAlQH0oOP1PsgxZMg+vejNw1Lij6u9iwJFgPy3G+CCo VtKUqlvcrLBYg53fvmrWdjOzxW1dI0ZdGW+l43pUWgOA1iFDxFg0BtlhCUIRj3up ghYbD0eN/LhjYmCkmE6nawxYis7gSCbh77pIVvdT3esYce51VHwPlSnRlzxkJ3J2 BdEw82YnpcOYdmiEP+BDBit/miDap8/RmwOlUPFdwQj0hnGg63gAF5drl4i0MV6b aqQI4lYdhxBGXT2V21QOwPVlFIdxrZl+qzdFpVNiW0x1ohgr+gWieO5VjX5RxGD/ iM0Daq5rswUUCq+Sdc/co1PVicfCNyhxHAyWSPcpcAQVRVr0STUH77prMUrFI41b Td+6lnWUlcTCvgjSH+UVwiROYdZMtW79bSQqTwf3/b2+RnXWY3ytHJRLay8ZoHHW GQzah7My3zs3GcsZbD9LwHCrhqJBfWF6TYn9SmJjylrzLJ43qYZScIKO3O7RgFfm ffDb6Xq4UVISad8AJKTryLCD4WY6Qtjcc8PqRIx/j0s1OwGbNUfsAtGQOg/gn67f wGO9+/wkkDHNjgbZd0jS =rEx1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-A7Pf+JP5fJ2DrSJmmQcE--