2014-11-22 11:39 GMT+01:00 john_perry_usm <john.pe...@usm.edu>: > On Friday, November 21, 2014 11:48:53 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote: >> >> In some post in this thread it was claimed that another post was sexist, >> even though there was enough reason to refuse the claim. One person imputed >> bad intention to another person, without considering "in dubio pro". Such >> questionable, annoying and distracting claims and imputations will occur a >> lot more when they can be based on the authority of a code of conduct. I >> don't want it. That's how my comment is related with the current discussion. >> > > +1. I repeat that a code that isn't enforced is worse than no code at all. >
That might be true for a "code" of conduct, but if we have only "recommendation" then it doesn't have to be enforced (or so I believe). Simon mentioned many times that "don't feed the troll" was the right thing to do. In my opinion, it is not quite enough. Let's say you receive a personal attack on a thread if you leave it just there, it's not helping you: * the thread was probably started on a real question that you still want to discuss. You can start another thread but you might be afraid that the attack just occurs again. * you leave a public attack to you unanswered on a public forum, I find it difficult to do. * if you say nothing to the other person, you might give him/ her the idea that he/she was right to do so. (And also maybe future readers, speaking of "giving the good example") On the example Anne gave, some of you mentioned that they talked to Nathann and told him privately that he was being out of line. In my opinion, with a list of recommendations we all agree on, we can just say publicly on the forum. "Please remember recommendations (a) and (b). This is out of line, let's go back to the original question." Of course, we can already do this somehow. But I feel the recommendation give us some "objective" points to check. It assures us that it's not us being oversensitive and that we have support of the community. Best, Viviane > > john perry > > PS For what it's worth, Simon, I first recall reading about "political > correctness" back in the 80s in a right-wing political magazine, shortly > before > I went to university. The Wikipedia article was illuminating on the > term's origin; I had no idea it started on the far left, and moved b/c the > neoconservatives imported. Thanks for pointing it out. > > -- > 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 post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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 post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
