Doris, please do not trivialize abuse. On Saturday, September 7, 2024 at 4:11:52 AM UTC-7 dantetante wrote:
> Dear list, > > boaaahhh come on guys! I again could't read all the past mails and cannot > comment objectively, but subjectively this feels like Kindergarten. Perhaps > Dima and Matthias (and the CoC group as well) should read >>Asterix and the > big fight<<? > > scnr > > ... some months ago I suggested the >>key players<< meeting in person and > a professional mediation, but the CoC did not plan anything in that > direction, right? > > SageMath is much too important to have quarrels like those destroy the > project ... so CoC please do some real management. Writing proposals and > E-Mails will not solve the problem, I believe. > > Doris > > > On 7. Sep 2024, at 09:36, Dima Pasechnik <dim...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 6 September 2024 22:29:35 BST, Matthias Koeppe <matthia...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Friday, September 6, 2024 at 1:23:21 PM UTC-7 jplab wrote: > >> > >> We would like to solicit suggestions from the community for a new > section > >> of the Sage Code of Conduct > >> <https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/develop/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md> > >> addressing blocking. The following is a draft: > >> > >> Blocking another SageMath developer on GitHub can be a valid response > to > >> extreme misconduct, aimed at reducing interactions. However, unless the > >> misconduct results in the blocked person being excluded from the > SageMath > >> project, such blocks should be temporary and last only until the > conflict > >> is resolved. The SageMath Code of Conduct Committee should work with > both > >> parties to lift the block. If the blocked person does not cooperate, > the > >> committee may sanction them. If the blocker does not cooperate, the > >> committee may decide that proper discussion on their Pull Requests and > >> Issues is not feasible, and request that the release manager not merge > any > >> of their Pull Requests until the block is lifted. > >> > >> We know that this issue is sensitive for several Sage developers [...] > >> > >> > >> A public discussion of this is meaningless as long as the public is > unaware > >> of the extent of dysfunction of the CoCC, which refuses to take the > >> necessary steps even in the face of persistent abuse. > >> > > > > We have a proposal to discuss. Functioning of a committee is a rather > different topic. > > > > As a target of blocking on GitHub, which I think is aimed at pushing me > out of the project, > > I very much welcome any way out of this limbo - even if it means that > the blocker is prevented from contributing to the project as long as the > block is at place. > > > > Dima > > > > > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "sage-devel" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/400569A6-180C-42BC-8B86-8F849A09315D%40gmail.com > . > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/9e530a8a-217d-4b10-b5f8-0e2184ba406fn%40googlegroups.com.
