Why don't you comment on any of the three links provided in the email you're replying to? That seems like an obvious venue for concerns you might have.
On 5 September 2015 at 17:32, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Matthew Flaschen <mflasc...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > >> There is consensus at >> >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Draft#Next_steps >> that the best way to finalize the CoC draft is to focus on a few >> sections at once (while still allowing people to comment on other >> ones). This allows progress without requiring people to monitor all >> sections at once and lets us separate the questions of “what are our >> goals here?” and “how should this work?”. After these sections are >> finalized, I recommend minimizing or avoiding later substantive >> changes to them. >> >> The first sections being finalized are the intro (text before the >> Principles section), Principles, and Unacceptable behavior. These >> have been discussed on the talk page for the last two weeks, and >> appear to have stabilized. >> >> However, there may still be points that need to be refined. Please >> participate in building consensus on final versions of these sections: >> >> * >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Draft >> >> * >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Draft >> >> If you are not comfortable contributing to this discussion under your >> name or a pseudonym, you can email your feedback or suggestions to >> conduct-discuss...@wikimedia.org . Quim Gil, Frances Hocutt, and >> Kalliope Tsouroupidou will be monitoring this address and will >> anonymously bring the points raised into the discussion at your >> request. >> >> > lol, consensus among whom, to what? i am against it (i'd love to send the > reasons in another mail though), do i count, and it is still consensus? > probably not, because i did maybe two unimportant commits for kiwix. i > would prefer if you would be so kind to define one measurable criteria for > the question "do we need a code of conduct", no matter if entry or success > criteria. e.g > > * 50 volunteers from different part of the world saying that we need it > * 20% of committers want it > * after one year 20% more volunteer commits are done > > other critieria like "people attending conferences", or "mails written" > would be a bad idea, as the goal is to have more contributions, not more > conference tourists or mailing list tourists. what you think, matt, or quim > ? > > best, > rupert > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Oliver Keyes Count Logula Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
