On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 02:44:10PM -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote: > > It would be helpful if that code of conduct had its own page and be > enumerated so that it could be referred to directly when we try to > self-regulate. Eg: "Yoh WhatsYourName, this topic, while interesting in > a general sense, is rather OT. Please take it off list, per the list > code of conduct item 13 at > http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/CodeOfConduct#13."; I keep getting 404's for this link and various versions of it, am I missing something? > > > To get this discussion going, I move that the Code of Conduct be adopted > as official debian policy. > > Seconded: > > Discussion: I have no opposition to a code of conduct. > > All in Favour: > > Opposed: > > > I propose we add a clause to the code of conduct to address the OT > issue. This half of the problem is generally followed but it should be > part of policy. The following wording is a starting point for discussion: > > > Discussions which are not Debian-Specific but which are relavent > to the list topic should have their subjects prepended with [OT] > to flag them for others as Off Topic. Discussions which are not > relavent to the list topic should be taken off the list. > > Seconded: > > Discussion: I have read most of this thread and have stayed out of it until now, but this seems like an appropriate time to put in my .02. I have in the past done my share (fair or not) of OT posting. Mostly, I try to keep it light, humorous and vaguely related (real geeks use <fill in the blank> type jokes etc. oh and requests for the list ethicist to jump in! joe?). But I've also gotten into a couple heated discussions as well. In the past I have defended other's rights to have OT discussions as I'd rather deal with the OT, then have my little contributions to it stifled. That said, I have grudgingly come to the realization over the past couple months that we've gotten out of hand. I would like to see a general agreement from those of us who are heavily involved in this list regarding the disposition of OT posts. I don't want to see them go away, but I would like to see us agree that when someone says "hey, enoguh is enough, can we drop this one" that we would do so. This is not a blanket approval, on my part, for anyone to just willy-nilly cancel OT threads, because often they aren't really OT, or are fun and light-hearted and so forth. BUt I think its clear to all of us, that when we start wandering into politics and religion and things start getting heated, that its probably time to let it go. Having another one of us more frequent contributors step up and say something would not bother me in the least. And I think it would not bother the rest. I know many of you have your particular gripes with each other, but you all also know when its probably gone too far. I think a little reason and respect for each other could do a lot. > > All in Favour: > > Opposed: > > > To address the second half of the problem, I propose we add a clause on > offensive posts. There is already a clause that says not to use foul > language, and one that says "try" not to flame. There is no excuse for > flaming or offensiveness in any discussion and it should not be > tolerated. The link provided in the code of conduct to the definition > of "flame" referres to impolite ranting which I think comes under the > more general term of offensive language. While it has been shown that > you can't legislate moral or polite behaviour, you can exclude people > who demonstrate impolite behaviour from a group. I propose the > following wording as a starting point for discussion: > > > Discussions and comments which are offensive, hateful, or > disrespectful to an individual or group are not permitted. > Swearing and foul language is not permited in any language > (exception: words in common usage in the list language may be > swear words in another language). > > Seconded: > > Discussion: I think this is obvious and anyone of us should feel free to tell someone to STFU for posting in this manner. SOme of you will split hairs and say that what to one is unacceptable is not so to others and I *agree* with you. But there are also generally accepted norms of behavior that we all recognise to some extent or another. and that's my .02 on it all. I'll let it drop now and do better to control my own OT stuff in the future. A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature