Re: Code of Conduct plan

Stephen Frost <[email protected]> Fri, 14 Sep 2018 10:15:33 -0400
Newsgroups	gmane.comp.db.postgresql.general,gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general,gmane.comp.db.postgresql.advocacy
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
Greetings,

* Adrian Klaver ([email protected]) wrote:
> On 9/14/18 1:31 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:53 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]
> ><mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >    I wrote:
> >     > Stephen Frost <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >    writes:
> >     >> We seem to be a bit past that timeline...  Do we have any update
> >    on when
> >     >> this will be moving forward?
> >     >> Or did I miss something?
> >
> >     > Nope, you didn't.  Folks have been on holiday which made it hard
> >    to keep
> >     > forward progress going, particularly with respect to selecting
> >    the initial
> >     > committee members.  Now that Magnus is back on shore, I hope we can
> >     > wrap it up quickly --- say by the end of August.
> >
> >    I apologize for the glacial slowness with which this has all been
> >    moving.
> >    The core team has now agreed to some revisions to the draft CoC based on
> >    the comments in this thread; see
> >
> >    https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
> >
> >    (That's the updated text, but you can use the diff tool on the page
> >    history tab to see the changes from the previous draft.)
> >
> >I really have to object to this addition:
> >"This Code is meant to cover all interaction between community members,
> >whether or not it takes place within postgresql.org
> ><http://postgresql.org> infrastructure, so long as there is not another
> >Code of Conduct that takes precedence (such as a conference's Code of
> >Conduct)."

I was wondering about that myself and rather had an objection to
implying that this CoC doesn't apply when there's a CoC set up for some
event.  The CoC for an event is typically going to be thinking about
things from the event's timeline (which is on the order of days),
whereas something which happened at an event reflects on the community
and should also be addressed at that level.

> I second that objection. It is not in PGDG's remit to cure the world, for
> whatever form of cure you ascribe to. This is especially true as 'community
> member' has no strict definition.

The goal of this CoC isn't to cure the world, it's to define what's
acceptable behavior to continue to be a member of this community, to
participate in this community through the mailing lists, IRC, etc, and
to be seen as a representative of the community/project.

We certainly have both the right and the remit to define who we want to
have in our community and to represent this community and project to
other communities, projects, organizations, and to people in general.
This CoC is about making it clear what's acceptable and what isn't and
making it clear to everyone, including other communities, that we take
conduct seriously and have a mechanism for dealing with issues that's
fair and reasonable.

Thanks!

Stephen
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 819 B)