Geoff and all, I only seconded Dave's point which has been raised several times.
Here what he had written Original point > * Participants will be tolerant of opposing views. Dave wrote >This statement can be used in defense of abusive behavior (“I was just >expressing an opposing view!”). If 50% disagree that this can happen then fine. I will go with the majority. But let's finalise this thread and move on. -----Original Message----- From: gwinkl...@gmail.com [mailto:gwinkl...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Winkless Sent: 24 January 2016 15:37 To: FarjadFarid(ChkNet); Postgres General Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CoC [Final v2] On 24 January 2016 at 14:53, FarjadFarid(ChkNet) <farjad.fa...@checknetworks.com> wrote: > I do agree with Dave on the points he has made. > > Can we please add these so everyone is happy and finalise the CoC? Sure, why not? Forget that at least 50% (I'm being generous) of the contributors to the thread disagree, we'll just do what you want because you're jumping on every thread and forcing your opinion on the list. We'll just need you and Dave to sign a legally binding contract that you will provide indemnity for any and all actions that might come about as a result, in all locations worldwide. Oh, and you'll need to pay the legal fees for lawyers (your own and ours) to ensure that it actually does that and that you either have the funds to cover it or you're paying for indemnity insurance that does cover it (no matter what happens or including whether the action is on behalf of or against one of the core team), and to advise on the exact liabilities and responsibilities of whoever implements the CoC. I'm sure that'll be fine, yes? Geoff -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
