[Arm-netbook] Code of conduct?

[mdn]

I am just a lurker a seeker of knowledge on this email list and tend to
stay out of discussions knowing that I don't have has much knowledge has
the people discussing here.

But I can't stay an say nothing on this subject I speak for Myself and
only Myself and my response is
no, I don't want that

Your heart may be in the right place but we all know where this leads.
COC like the Contributor Covenant have made enough trouble and it has to
stop.

Le 16/09/2016 22:06, Sam Pablo Kuper a écrit :
> I am still new to this community, and am more of a lurker than a
> contributor.
> 
> Many of the projects I am interested in have a code of conduct of some
> kind, typically based on the Contributor Covenant[0]. If they are
> well-written and proportionate, I find them welcoming. And I,
> correspondingly, welcome them. Not because anything especially terrible
> has happened to me in such communities, but because it would send a
> clear message that nothing terrible should happen to me or to anyone
> else as a result of participating, and that were such to happen, it
> would not be tolerated lightly.
> 
> I searched this mailing list's archive, the Rhombus Tech wiki, and the
> elinux.org wiki, for evidence of a code of conduct.
> 
> Happily, the elinux.org wiki does effectively have a code of conduct:
> 
> http://elinux.org/ELinuxWiki:Policies_%26_Guidelines
> 
> However, neither the arm-netbook mailing list nor the Rhombus Tech wiki
> has one, as far as I can see.
> 
> Does anyone else here think it would be, on balance, a good idea to
> adopt a Code of Conduct, perhaps based on the Contributor Covenant[0],
> for some combination of: this mailing list; the Rhombus Tech wiki?
> 
> I would welcome concise responses in this thread, ideally formatted
> along the lines:
> 
> """
> - arm-netbook list: yes.
> 
> - Rhombus Tech wiki: yes.
> """
> 
> I would, personally, *not* welcome receiving supporting arguments for
> your position, for the following reasons:
> 
> - I am much more interested in the community's view on whether or not
> adopting such a code would be a good idea, than its view on why it would
> or would not be a good idea.
> 
> - In discussions of the merits of such codes of conduct, both supporters
> and detractors typically raise pros or cons that have already been
> raised, by them or others, in at least one of the many such discussions
> that have occurred other communities. That is, the arguments on both
> sides of the debate are quite well-worn. I would prefer anyone
> interested in such pros and cons to look them up (e.g. search the Web)
> than to expend effort re-hashing them here.
> 
> - Such discussions of rationale often become contentious. The last thing
> I want is to cause acrimony on the list.
> 
> I hope that affirmative replies will predominate. If they do, then I
> will at some point in the future probably add a draft Code of Conduct
> page to the Rhombus Tech wiki and/or ask Luke to add one to the mailing
> list web page[1], as appropriate (unless someone else acts first). If
> they don't, or if nobody replies, then I'll quietly let this go.
> 
> Thanks :)
> 
> spk
> 
> [0] http://contributor-covenant.org/
> [1] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/pipermail/arm-netbook/attachments/20160916/e64dc925/attachment.sig>