Re: GNU Kind Communication Guidelines versus "social contract" or Codes of Conduct

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Andreas Enge, 06/11/19 11:33:
> If you start by equating two unrelated concepts, nothing useful can come
> out of a discussion.

I don't know about equating, but there is a clear connection. When you 
establish some rules with some sanctions, and a process to enforce them, 
this process needs to be depend on somebody or something. If this 
something is not held accountable to the same values and methods that 
the project normally operates on, it's easy to have a conflict.

A common example is a self-appointed enforcer attached to an entity 
accountable only to itself (as many USA foundations are). If you add it 
on top of a project whose community is a do-ocracy or democracy, based 
on some values, there is no way to make sure the enforcer respects the 
community's values.

(Forgive the following analogy.) Many software projects have a 
"constitution" but said constitution has no teeth. If you add a 
"criminal law" and there is no way to hold the respective 
executive/judicial power in check, whatever values the "constitution" 
proclaims are no longer worth the paper they're printed on.

The traditional GNU structure at least is coherent because there is a 
single source of legitimacy. In Debian, as far as I understand, 
everything is under the project leader, who is however elected. In 
Wikimedia there's a self-appointed legal entity with its own bureaucracy 
(Wikimedia Foundation) and a separate community with its own values and 
processes. These things are not easy to get right.

Federico