On 07/09/2016 02:52 AM, 'scott molinari' via PHP Framework
Interoperability Group wrote:
In other words, the FIG as an organization, can't show Paul his wrong
doing, because there is nothing to go by other than personal opinion.
The FIG also can't just vote a member out of the mailing list, because
there is no mention of this process in the by-laws.
" If, in the judgement of PHP-FIG, a Voting Representative is acting
inappropriately and to the detriment of PHP-FIG's ability to meet its
objectives, a vote may be taken to request a replacement Voting
Representative in accordance with the Voting Protocol bylaw
<https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/blob/master/bylaws/001-voting-protocol.md> or
to expel the Member Project where replacing a Voting Representative is
not possible."
http://www.php-fig.org/bylaws/membership/#voting-representatives
That is the current bylaw. The vote that now seems inevitable to happen
is, precisely, to request a new representative from Aura.
"In the judgment of PHP-FIG" is, yes, subjective. A perfectly objective
definition of behavior is impractical to impossible to define. All
accountability for "bad behavior" is to some degree subjective, because
humans.
You are correct that FIG currently has no explicit "ban from the list"
bylaw. That was a flaw in its original construction, frankly, albeit a
common one for such a loose group in its early days. At the moment, the
closest we have is this ability of the Secretaries: "Moderate
discussions on github, the mailing list and IRC channels to ensure that
an appropriate environment is maintained". Whether "moderate" includes
"ban" is not specified, but over the last 6 months we've decently-well
established by precedent that it can. It's also easier to do with a
non-voting-rep than a voting rep, since a voting rep, well, needs to be
able to post in order to vote.
To be frank, those arguing in various forms that it's inappropriate for
FIG, or just for "a standards body" (why?), to hold people accountable
for their actions are arguing that FIG must tolerate any bad behavior,
no matter how bad. It's begging for hostile, toxic, and abusive
behavior to become standard, because that's what inevitably happens. Or
perhaps they're just hoping that we can stick to informal,
behind-the-scenes enforcement so that it's easier for those who don't
care if they're being rude and disruptive to ignore it entirely. That's
no good either.
In the end, the question is simple: Is Paul -- in aggregate over time --
acting "inappropriately and to the detriment of PHP-FIG's ability to
meet its objectives", and is Paul unwilling to address the problem? If
you feel the answer to those questions is yes, vote remove. If not, don't.
If it were just one person who had an issue with Paul's behavior, I'd be
more sympathetic toward the "think skin" argument. When 20 people take
issue with him (and even by his own count, half of those involved in the
discussion), it indicates the problem is more than just someone being
overly-sensitive.
--Larry Garfield
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/5781572F.20405%40garfieldtech.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
