Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > > On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote: >>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: >>> >>> Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to make fair >>> decisions (NOT that we would always agree with, but that are fair) that don't fall too far into >>> "thought policing", in *any* direction? If not, then the community is already lost beyond >>> all hope and we should all just give up now. I do not believe that to be the case, at all. >> Too long spent in a position of power, and even the most fair can become unfair. >> >> As I have suggested before: *if* there is to be a response team, let it be randomly >> selected on per-reported-incident basis from the pool of voters. Then there is no possibility of a >> charge of continuing bias, and it distributes power among the pool, instead of concentrating it into >> a few members. >> >> Proponents of the response team: thoughts? > > Randomly selected: Absolutely not. I wouldn't randomly select someone to make Ultimate > Decision(tm) on a technical RFC, either. But if a question about, say, a parser bug came up there > are absolutely certain people that I would trust with that question more than others, and defer to > their analysis/opinion more readily. Certain people *you* would trust more than others, but that *others* would not trust more. Also, this is a social/political realm, and not a technical realm; would you not trust, say, a randomly-selected jury to hear and decide on a case? If not, why not? -- Paul M. Jones pmjones88@gmail.com http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php