Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m35-v6csp1868173imm; Sat, 29 Sep 2018 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV60ctDdWymhRsa6WPoVaWJHMGZzDZgnGUVPU3Qypca/PQi4UKoWL1K24K4zgEXGW1QVXVgMZ X-Received: by 2002:a63:9409:: with SMTP id m9-v6mr1508495pge.93.1538225112327; Sat, 29 Sep 2018 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1538225112; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=YfW6Jpg2ZvZ61V2ETrW23OXkAhXRVwrkTO9Qr4z1BaFmjf8E5ddQOkwwHDUtr2uKvd 7v746vHfZFTCH/uO0xibe0W5w9J5z+wVHKIsA91nZBTiqzWE8/VXYHDRkSQbsHfYCrf0 hUYKqmSWF11TiGetMaaolMus5LCV5YJCfrsWBK8GhpdA8dEANx6ltZKUc2PhMTTsX4dS hyCJtR94cNfXkgvQPQfVeHR5pqxRd4kdhNSIylV7d3myvOiG8DmZMisYrsHLvAkhvHNQ XpWvOnr6UG9yKK2MOBx2yJo5YtkcvfNIer9lS7VQYznOZGgKR+DZ/FMfdEjIok1YxNDV vaUw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:organization:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:mail-followup-to :reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=yaNW6SoIGSLoJz3V4TUAPAJ8ahSfl/pSovT0iRr6fZw=; b=kFv09SoDFwJC55k47u3pgD4UhrLeJehRTvBsMGaMK29OlxrsXUoBsUdTPIqL+p5b8n OssGVkwipge/pxBhl8nTAR6WgfQ7XPwqcCo+BKZDC6gHnamnoBaHpBGRaeUA+7ORjo/b dwmrwNWNXQzYs6K7UQ5xkuExJo+rOxMOP5d+EbI2AjvDxuxjxQkHcoabMVPHEXlhZRt4 /6tG21aN588xf7zRSoeRKxW+vAwYclHyXwRaAq5f+qJONOyKID8cHMqd10jS3GEeTQNj oiD35Uom6QbpnqUpuGXRRlETgggxuPQPKjrZko83j9tcbHWvlQDLde3xh78DPJg9hUVJ sJLA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b10-v6si7731052pla.253.2018.09.29.05.44.46; Sat, 29 Sep 2018 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728085AbeI2TND (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 29 Sep 2018 15:13:03 -0400 Received: from thyrsus.com ([71.162.243.5]:53716 "EHLO snark.thyrsus.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727979AbeI2TND (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Sep 2018 15:13:03 -0400 Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3D6AE3A42A2; Sat, 29 Sep 2018 08:44:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 08:44:18 -0400 From: "Eric S. Raymond" To: Alan Cox Cc: Bernd Petrovitsch , xDynamite , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Theodore Tso , fche@redhat.com, riel@surriel.com, ec429@cantab.net, Olof Johansson , Jonathan Corbet , lkml Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it. Message-ID: <20180929124418.GA23354@thyrsus.com> Reply-To: esr@thyrsus.com Mail-Followup-To: esr@thyrsus.com, Alan Cox , Bernd Petrovitsch , xDynamite , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Theodore Tso , fche@redhat.com, riel@surriel.com, ec429@cantab.net, Olof Johansson , Jonathan Corbet , lkml References: <87zhwbj8xe.fsf@redhat.com> <20180921231545.GC2966@thunk.org> <8c18dcc5-9028-672f-1449-359ac3d73592@petrovitsch.priv.at> <9be16b08-7aa9-d42e-24c0-f054af39b78a@petrovitsch.priv.at> <20180928165653.17bbdb13@alans-desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180928165653.17bbdb13@alans-desktop> Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox : > The wording IMHO just needs tightening up - and that's a useful > discussion that ought to he bad. I tihnk everyone understands the *inent* > of such wording - don't go around doxing people, or posting their home > address on facebook and calling for people to attend with pitchforks. I'm going to, again, avoid normative statements and try to clarify what the questions are here, speaking from my anthropologist/game-theorist head. As a matter of process, there are two different sets of issues about changing the CoC wording. Referring to my previous post on ethos and telos: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/23/212 1. The wording needs to be tweaked to make it clearer what things are against the ethos. For example: we may want Code violations to include hateful speech on the mailing list directed at other LKML members. Does it follow that we want the Code to proscribe "hate speech" directed against third parties, or off-list "hateful" behavior? Perhaps we do, perhaps not; but either way the boundaries need to be clearer. 2. The language needs to be examined with particular care to discover where it implies a change to LKML's telos. I argue no position at this time about whether LKML's telos *should* change, but I note that the rather heated dissent the CoC has provoked comes from a widespread perception that it *is*, in fact, a none-too-covert attempt to alter the telos. I further note that this perception is supported by the CoC Author's "Post-Meritocracy manifesto". https://postmeritocracy.org/ Kernel contributors, understandably, want a clear read on whether the application of the CoC is to be guided by meritocratic or "post-meritocratic" principles. This is a telos issue, not just an ethos issue, and much more fundamental. I endorse a suggestion made elsewhere that a revised CoC would best be developed by an RFC-like process. Because *that is how we do such things*; that is *our* culture's mechanism for achieving and maintaining consensus on difficult issues. -- Eric S. Raymond My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.