[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?
From: |
Mathieu Lirzin |
Subject: |
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines? |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Oct 2018 18:06:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hello Ludo,
address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mathieu Lirzin <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> Following the announcement made by RMS regarding the new GNU Kind
>> Communication Guidelines (GKCG) [1], I would like to know if the Guix
>> developpers in particular its maintainers would agree to adopt it in
>> place of the current Code of Conduct (CoC)?
>
> Speaking for myself: no. I think the GKCG fails to address important
> issues, such as defining what’s acceptable and what’s not as well as
> clear processes to address this.
I am sad that you feels that the GKCG is not sufficient for defining the
acceptable behavior of the members of a Free Software community.
>> Adopting the GKCG instead of a CoC would help attracting people (like
>> me) who agree to use a welcoming and respectful language which
>> encourages everyone to contribute but are reluctant in contributing to
>> any project following a CoC due to its punitive nature and the politics
>> of its authors [2][3].
>
> Codes of conduct codify acceptable behavior and formalize processes:
> what can I do as a contributor if I’m a victim bad behavior or
> harassment? What are the group communication rules? What if I
> knowingly break those rules?
>
> By adopting the code of conduct, we maintainers committed to spend our
> time as needed to so your experience contributing to Guix won’t be a
> source of stress or worse, as is too often the case in on-line
> communities.
>
> The GKCG do not do that. Problems will be dealt with in an ad hoc
> fashion (as they already are in groups that have not codified rules), if
> they are addressed at all.
>
> I hope this answers your question.
Yes it does perfectly.
I personnaly think dealing with such issues in an ad hoc fashion is the
right approach when acceptable behaviors are the norm, which IME has
been the case.
Anyway I still hope that the Guix community will eventually accept the
GKCG as an acceptable tradeoff in the CoC debate.
Thanks.
--
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
- Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), (continued)
- Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Mark H Weaver, 2018/10/30
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Christopher Lemmer Webber, 2018/10/30
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Thorsten Wilms, 2018/10/30
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Alex Sassmannshausen, 2018/10/31
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Thorsten Wilms, 2018/10/31
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Alex Sassmannshausen, 2018/10/31
- Re: Patch submission should not imply agreement to policy (was Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?), Mark H Weaver, 2018/10/31
- Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Tonton, 2018/10/29
- RE: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Cook, Malcolm, 2018/10/29
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, Ludovic Courtès, 2018/10/24
Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines?, HiPhish, 2018/10/28