On 9/8/24 17:27, Christian Mazakas via Boost wrote:
On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 7:25 PM Ion Gaztañaga via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I also prefer to set aside controversial issues like Codes of Conduct (who defines “hate”/”harassment”/” inappropriate”? who enforces it? etc.), because I don’t think will help increase participation in the project.
A Code of Conduct shouldn't ever be controversial, especially because Boost has already had a de facto one for decades.
https://www.boost.org/community/policy.html
The problem is, if you named this code-of-conduct.html, it triggers a visceral reaction such as Andrey chudding out quite badly in my review thread.
If you consider our current discussion policy as CoC then fine. I suppose, we don't need to change anything in this regard then, right? In my view it's not the same thing, though. A CoC is typically different both in form and effect. A CoC would typically use subjective terms such as "hate speech", "harrasment", "friendly", "welcoming" and "inclusive" to describe what is or isn't allowed. Then there would be a body who enforces the CoC. The interpretation of whether a communication or behavior adheres to the CoC would be left to that body, which opens opportunity for abuse and political infight. It may also be used as an instrument to enforce inclusivity agenda. At best, this results in sugar-coating or filtering opinions expressed during the discussion, at worst it can lead to banning people who disagree and refuse to follow these rules. I regularly read news about such issues in other projects, here are just a couple latest ones: https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/09/core_python_developer_suspended_coc/ https://discourse.gnome.org/t/updates-to-the-gnome-foundation-board-of-direc... I do not want to see anything like that in Boost.