On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:54 AM, <rdrake98 / gmail.com> wrote:

> Issue #12004 has been updated by Richard Drake.
> PJ Hagerty:
> > I don't see any negatives.
> At least ten of us on this thread have made it clear we see what happened
> to Elia Schito in June as a negative. Nobody's had the guts to address
> this: either to say they think it was right or that it was wrong but the
> new CoC is a good thing anyway. Whichever it is, the silence is highly
> unpersuasive.


This is disingenuous at best. There have been several people, including me,
who have indicated that the Contributor Covenant is not the best choice for
Ruby because it is essentially meant for self-organizing groups based
around repositories, rather than well-established communities.

Additionally, bringing up something that happened in June in an unrelated
(or at best *distantly related*) community that at least some of us had not
heard of before last week (I know that I hadn°«t) and judging everyone that
is participating and communicating in favour of a code of conduct is rather
like holding you responsible for ESR°«s ramblings.

I will also note that all of the name-calling that has happened on this
ticket has been from people who are opposed to a code of conduct in any
form (and they have also attempted to derail by suggesting the so-called
°»Code of Merit°… that practically *enshrines* exclusion and harassment based
on perceived lack of merit). There have been people opposed to the
Contributor Covenant but in favour of a code of conduct like Jeremy Evans
who has suggested something that is (IMO) a good start.

Like I said, this claim is disingenuous *at best*, but I think it°«s
actually deliberate misrepresentation.

-a
-- 
Austin Ziegler  halostatue / gmail.com  austin / halostatue.ca
http://www.halostatue.ca/  http://twitter.com/halostatue
(supressed text/html)
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>