Ted Husted wrote: > > The example project guidelines and cultural principles were added to > put the draft community guidelines into context. Though, we might not > want to post all three items together as a block.
Yea - I'm sort of confused. I'm looking to inject two more concepts, reinforce that you are you (not your company), that companies aren't here (thou there employees may be) they are participating as ASF folk, not as company X folk, and that what is private@ to the ASF doesn't leave the ASF. (Any more than we want you to share private stuff from your company here with the ASF). Respect privacy boundaries, and act as yourself, an individual participant, first. Not as an employee. We sort of start down that path in a few spots already, but didn't really bring that picture full circle yet. One other bit, shouldn't it be "developer-friendly license terms?" (That is, developers should be free to use the code however they like for whatever purpose it serves them, as opposed to FSF'isms that code has inherent freedom to be expressed. That's how I've described the AL/GPL divide in the past). > Of course, when a resource is public, our only recourse is to shun an > obnoxious participant, since unsubbing someone that obnoxious will > simply encourage more bad behavior under a new email address. We > should try and be sure that our communities understand that "Don't > feed the trolls" does work. Oh ya. We've had those too - in fact it's been interesting that the banned wiki spammer suddenly started communicating on docs after their wiki keys were taken away. And maybe started to grok what they had been doing wrong. (Or not, heh.) It's more effective to ignore/shun, than to begin banning IPs from public mailing lists for misbehavior. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
