|
Eldon Koyle wrote:
Can we just go back to Godwin's law?I have noticed a pattern on Debian lists where we see: 1) a polarizing issue is brought up on the list 1a) (optional) there is some discussion with a few interesting points 2) people start arguing (useful debate has ended) 3) people start using offensive language somehow expecting it to help the situation (while also feeling justified in breaking the rules because someone else broke a different, "more important" rule) 4) someone points out the offensive language in #4 is, in fact, against the rules 5) someone claims that the act of pointing out the offensive language detracts from the argument^Wdiscussion or human dignity or what have you (I think it was actually the decision to break the "lesser" rule) I would like to propose that we shorten this cycle by simply adding a rule to bounce messages to public lists at #3 (ie. those containing language that is unquestionably against both the Code of Conduct and the mailing list code of conduct) with a message asking the sender to please revise their message and links to the relevant documents stating what is acceptable (as if they don't already know). The common belief seems to be that "we are all adults here", but we haven't been acting that way. If there are cries about censorship, I guess we could make the bounce a "warning: you are about to break the rules so blatantly that software can figure it out in front of the whole internet, do you want to continue?" -- but I think we should also have more deterrents for breaking the rules in this case. Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra Theory is when you know everything but nothing works. Practice is when everything works but no one knows why. In our lab, theory and practice are combined: nothing works and no one knows why. ... unknown |