Re: CoC policy for package contents

Soren Stoutner <[email protected]> Mon, 21 Jul 2025 13:01:29 -0700

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote
Organization	Debian
Message-ID	<6745428.zIJbB62Pao@soren-desktop>

On Monday, July 21, 2025 7:41:10 AM Mountain Standard Time Wouter Verhelst 
wrote:
> One thing I learned while drafting the original code of conduct is that
> it's always OK, and sometimes sometimes beneficial, to be vague.
> 
> If you make up rules of human behavior, there will always be a bit of a
> gray zone where it is not clear whether something is allowed, according
> to the rules, or not. You can never hope to eliminate that gray zone
> completely; you can only make it asymptotically smaller. However, every
> time you try to do so, there are two things that will happen:
> - Your text gets larger and larger, until it gets unwieldy
> - The chance increases of the rules outlawing something that should not
>   be outlawed, or not outlawing something that should be.
> 
> Because of this, I think it is a better idea to have a definition that
> uses terms that are generally understood while still having some leeway
> in it.

I second this.  I think a principle-based code of acceptable content is much 
better than an enumerated-list-of-all-possibilities (which you will never 
really arrive at anyway) based code of acceptable content.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
[email protected]

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)