On 1/27/16, Peter Tonoli <anarchie+cpunks@metaverse.org> wrote:
Hello,
Quoting Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net>:
Hi cp-ers,
On the PostgreSQL database mailing list pgsql-general@postgresql.org , they are discussing a Code of Conduct.
Seems the Ruby language community are having the same discussion. This <http://rubinius.com/2016/01/26/the-problem-with-minaswan/> blog post summarises the authors argument nicely against these contracts.
Thank you very much for the link - will read now.
I quite like the argument that 'disagreeing is not nice'; we have the threat that list members won't contribute to 'arguments' because there's the risk they may be seen as harassing or not being 'nice', when it should be accepted that respectful arguments are 'healthy' in a community.
Argument healthy? Come now, everybody vilt agree with me now, surely you must know zis!! Auto-philia is the only sanctioned sexuality on cpers, and any infraction will incursion a long and penetrating punishment! Any argument with this new responsibly restraint position shall be referred to Juan the One, and Rayzer the Precise, with moderation by Me ze Correct, for rezolution now ok
On the other hand, I can't see Cypherpunks agreeing to a 'code of conduct', or adhering to it.
Come on ... surely you jest?!? I wuz just about to propose we do like the Postgrs developers, create a committee designated by the core cpers, with an initial proposed CoC in line with the pg one, in about 3 months, and a final, to be published in 3 major national US papers to ensure the public gets the message. FEMA camp tickets, water boards and Pb shall be provided to all in pursuit of the greater good, dispose of each as you wilt.