Wanted behaviors?

Posted Mar 19, 2015 10:43 UTC (Thu) by NAR (subscriber, #1313)
Parent article: Conflict over a code

list of unwanted behaviors was left out [...] to avoid attempts to play games around the edge of the rules

I very much agree with this. What about a list of wanted behaviors? A kind of protocol (in the original sense) to avoid offending. Or something like RFC 2119 to specify words that shall be used in review (e.g. "not acceptable" instead of "this is a pile of excrement").

Wanted behaviors?

Posted Mar 19, 2015 16:58 UTC (Thu) by rgmoore (✭ supporter ✭, #75) [Link] (1 responses)

e.g. "not acceptable" instead of "this is a pile of excrement"

I think the primary goal is not to restrict language that way. It's about limiting the invective to code and ideas rather than the people who submit them. IOW, "this is a pile of excrement" is within the CoC; it's "only someone with excrement for brains would have submitted this" that is outside it.

Wanted behaviors?

Posted Mar 21, 2015 4:32 UTC (Sat) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> "this is a pile of excrement" is within the CoC;

Technically, this is indeed only describing the code and not any person.

Practically, what does everyone think of someone submitting a "pile of excrement"? Compare to someone else submitting something which is merely "not acceptable".

It'd be nice if very clear lines could be drawn, but human communication is not simple enough for that. Rules and guidelines are still very useful because they are enough in most cases, however some level of interpretation is always required for borderline cases like this one.