I agree not interacting is probably not a solution and your contribution without other details is not an excuse.
But I think existing CoC have problems. There are statements everywhere about discrimination protection for example which are very controversial. The problem with that in other communities was already mentioned. I disagree it's not a big deal and have more benefits than negative aspect. We provided a lot of problematic real-life examples, since it's still hard to prove positive impact. I guess we should try to develop better version, I don't see real-life benefits from existing CoC at other communities. сб, 27 окт. 2018 г., 17:53 Martin Smith <martin.sm...@qt.io>: > >I am yet to hear an answer about what is going to be done in case the > person > >mistreating is an active contributor. > >Will you chose potential harm, over actual benefit of having such a > person on the > >project? > > Active contributors who abuse others should be treated the same as > inactive contributors who abuse others. What would be done would of course > depend on what the abuser did. I suppose the abuser (active contributor or > not) would be informed as to what he/she did wrong and would be told to > stop doing it. > > Your remarks seem to mean you would rather ignore harm to get the benefit. > I hope that's not what you mean. Being a super contributor doesn't buy one > the privilege of being an asshole to others. > > ________________________________________ > From: NIkolai Marchenko <enmarantis...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 4:03:41 PM > To: Martin Smith > Cc: Konstantin Shegunov; Qt development mailing list > Subject: Re: [Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct > > I am yet to hear an answer about what is going to be done in case the > person mistreating is an active contributor. > Will you chose potential harm, over actual benefit of having such a person > on the project? > > The edge case being, for example, if a module maintainer is mistreating > someone for whatever reason. > The other person can just stop trying to interact with that maintainer, > but I fail to see how removing a maintainer over a potential benefit of > someone not being mistreated actually benefits the project. > > I've heard from people in this thread that it _is_ a problem you are > trying to sovle and there _have _ been mistreatment. > Now, I am not asking for dirty laundry, but isn't community supposed to > know at least in broad strokes, the kind of problems yo uare even tring to > solve before actually voting on anything? > Maybe the community have a better answer for these specific problems? > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 4:56 PM Martin Smith <martin.sm...@qt.io<mailto: > martin.sm...@qt.io>> wrote: > > >1) To contact the contributor first and try to resolve the issue civilly. > >2) To seek help with a third party (another contributor) who is known to > the > >alleged victim and who can act as mediator to try an resolve it. > >3) If 1) and 2) don't work he/she may also bring it to the attention of > the > >community (e.g. the mailing list). The community is then free to react or > not to > >react. > > You just specified a code of conduct. The problem with your code of > conduct is that it isn't guaranteed to end in resolution. > > >The implication that currently, if you're feeling mistreated, it's > impossible to act > >(respectfully) against harassment seems rather far-fetched to me. > > But that isn't the implication. The implication is that a mistreated > person can take the actions you have specified, and the result can be that > the mistreatment, real or not, is not resolved. > > ________________________________________ > From: Konstantin Shegunov <kshegu...@gmail.com<mailto:kshegu...@gmail.com > >> > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 3:48:49 PM > To: Martin Smith > Cc: development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org> > Subject: Re: [Development] QUIP 12: Code of Conduct > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 4:09 PM Martin Smith <martin.sm...@qt.io<mailto: > martin.sm...@qt.io><mailto:martin.sm...@qt.io<mailto:martin.sm...@qt.io>>> > wrote: > In that case, if a contributor is mistreated by another contributor, what > recourse does the victim have? > > 1) To contact the contributor first and try to resolve the issue civilly. > 2) To seek help with a third party (another contributor) who is known to > the alleged victim and who can act as mediator to try an resolve it. > 3) If 1) and 2) don't work he/she may also bring it to the attention of > the community (e.g. the mailing list). The community is then free to react > or not to react. > > The implication that currently, if you're feeling mistreated, it's > impossible to act (respectfully) against harassment seems rather > far-fetched to me. > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org<mailto:Development@qt-project.org> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
