I personally offered at least two emails with constructive feedback and alternative solutions. I never saw any reply or feedback to either one. I also had some emails in which I was somewhat argumentative (the ones related to the definition of harassment). I still stand by those emails as they were a perfect example of why I feel the CoC, as proposed, is a bad idea.
My take away from Anthony's last email is basically: "We're going to have a CoC whether you like it or not. You are welcome to offer feedback to make the CoC better after we propose it, but any feedback that says a CoC is bad will be viewed as non-constructive and ignored." Everyone is so afraid that people are afraid to get involved now because they don't feel "safe." We're heading for the exact same situation, only for different reasons. I personally feel, faced with the two alternatives, a community where we put into "law" a system that discourages participation is much worse than a system where the lack of such "law" prevents them. This is exactly the kind of behavior we are afraid of: "disagree with me too much and I'll label you a trouble maker." The difference is, with a CoC in place, there is now a tool that can be used to seek formal "charges" in such cases. With power concentrated in only a few individuals, the potential for abuse is high - and that's considering that the committee operates in a way they believe is good. It's even worse if you have an individual on the committee with their own agenda that isn't operating in such a way. On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:59 AM Tom Worster <f...@thefsb.org> wrote: > On 1/11/16 10:46 PM, John Bafford wrote: > > Stop the nonsense. Get better, grow up, treat each other with respect, > and act like the adults you are. I'd like to work with you all, but you > make it dammned hard to want to. > > Hi John, > > Good for you for writing and sending your email! Really. > > The nature of the discourse on Internals serves a political purpose that > your opening quote hints at. In the most general terms, it serves to > protect the status quo. Specifically it functions to protect the de > facto leadership of the PHP project. > > So while I support the general thrust of your email, I don't think much > will come from asking folk to tone it down. Framing this as marketing of > PHP and Internals to the wider world, while valid, allows us to dance > around the core problem. > > Tom > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- -- Chase chasepee...@gmail.com
