Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <e223b198-af0e-123d-49bf-fad7e0f9126e@cantab.net>
 <20180919081812.020f19e3@lwn.net>
From:   Edward Cree <ec429@cantab.net>
Message-ID: <72dadc76-44fe-ecb5-e142-0a9129082c93@cantab.net>
Date:   Thu, 20 Sep 2018 00:35:10 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180919081812.020f19e3@lwn.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 19/09/18 15:18, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> I'd like to address just this part, speaking only for myself.
> The LF is not in the position of arbitrating anything here.  The body
> charged with that is the LF Technical Advisory Board, which is a
> different thing.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Jon, you're a good person, and I trust you not to harass developers.
=C2=A0I'm not expecting you, or gregkh, or hpa to launch a dastardly plot
=C2=A0to boot an innocent developer off the project.

But there are too many ways this can go wrong, maybe not now or next
=C2=A0week but in five or ten years, when maybe a different kind of perso=
n
=C2=A0is on the TAB, or maybe external pressure is brought to bear on TAB
=C2=A0members.=C2=A0 (Some people are speculating that pressure has alrea=
dy
=C2=A0been brought to bear on Linus, although I'd like to stress that if
=C2=A0he feels that changing the way he communicates is best for the
=C2=A0project then I for one thoroughly respect that.)

Or maybe some manipulative extrovert will manage to whip up a media
=C2=A0storm about some developer's innocuous remarks, the court of public
=C2=A0opinion will immediately convict, other developers will be caught
=C2=A0in a preference falsification cascade as no-one wants to take the
=C2=A0risk of defending them.=C2=A0 Are you, and the other members of the=
 TAB,
=C2=A0strong enough to hold back the lynch mobs when you know the guy
=C2=A0hasn't done anything wrong?=C2=A0 Do you really want to take on the
=C2=A0responsibility to do that, perhaps time and time again?=C2=A0 And c=
an
=C2=A0you be sure that you won't fall for a misleading framing by some
=C2=A0charismatic sociopath of a fight you missed the start of?

Given that possibility, I think it is important for the kernel
=C2=A0community to continue to send a strong signal that divisive identit=
y
=C2=A0politics are not welcome here; and I think that to adopt a Code of
=C2=A0Conduct that contains in its opening sentence a laundry-list of
=C2=A0protected classes (and was written by a, shall we say, divisive
=C2=A0figure with a history of identity politics advocacy) sends precisel=
y
=C2=A0the opposite signal.

Linux is too important to civilisation to allow it to be turned into
=C2=A0just another battlefield for the American culture war; commit
=C2=A08a104f8b5867 seems like an invitation to both armies to take up
=C2=A0positions on our fertile farmland.=C2=A0 The only rule that gives n=
o
=C2=A0comfort to discriminatory political abusers (on either side) is=E2=80=
=94
=C2=A0ye shall judge by their code alone.