| svaksha | General invite to -- #openhatch - a discussion participating in Open Source Communities -- -- Want to learn more about Openhatch? visit http://openhatch.org/ | 04:33 |
|---|---|---|
| svaksha | we are discussing how to make it easier to contribute/search LP , https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-women/2010-October/003033.html | 04:34 |
| hggdh | svaksha: hello, I would like to know how is https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CodeOfConductGuidelines proceeding, it at all | 16:31 |
| svaksha | hggdh: hi. i'm not sure i understood what you mean | 16:33 |
| maco | svaksha: i told him to ask you about it because he asked me whether there was still an effort with that, and id never seen it before, but you wrote it | 16:34 |
| * svaksha notes that it is an OLD document | 16:34 | |
| maco | i assume he means are you still trying to get the CC to +1 it | 16:34 |
| svaksha | maco: ah, ok | 16:34 |
| hggdh | svaksha: yes, it is old (and also marked as draft). But it is good... | 16:34 |
| hggdh | yes, it would be nice to keep on | 16:35 |
| svaksha | maco: hggdh , afaik, the CC didnt approve it. maybe some points were taken to the existing official CoC | 16:35 |
| svaksha | but this was just a draft made after some incidents in the ubuntu community | 16:36 |
| svaksha | hggdh: thanks (re good) | 16:36 |
| hggdh | yeah, I sort of remember the issues | 16:36 |
| hggdh | svaksha: my pleasure. Pity it got blocked | 16:36 |
| * svaksha shrugs | 16:36 | |
| svaksha | thanks for reminding me, i had forgotten it exists :) | 16:37 |
| hggdh | yw | 16:40 |
| svaksha | it needs polishing though...i'll be happy if you or anyone else wants to take it upon themselve to improve it | 16:41 |
| svaksha | maybe even work on getting CC approval <-- a bonus :) | 16:42 |
| AlanBell | interesting document, haven't seen that one before | 16:47 |
| hggdh | svaksha: will try | 16:48 |
| svaksha | the dispute resolution document and this came around the same time. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CodeOfConductDisputeResolution | 16:56 |
| * svaksha thinks a CoC is complete when ALL points are addressed. Currently signing the CoC puts more conditions on those that agree, than on those that dont sign it. | 16:59 | |
| AlanBell | isn't that the point? | 17:00 |
| svaksha | also there is nothing in the CoC about DR <-- that is important | 17:02 |
| svaksha | AlanBell: isnt that a loophole? one who does not sign it can get away with misbehaviour | 17:03 |
| maco | in ubuntu fora (forums, irc, mailing lists) even non-signers are expected to abide by it | 17:10 |
| svaksha | maco: i'm probably speaking with the old incidents in mind :) | 17:14 |
| hggdh | well, there is a(n old) saying that goes something like 'when you enter a city, abide by its rules'. Not signing the CoC does not free one from abiding to it | 17:40 |
| hggdh | so I do not see a loophole there. Having the CoC clears out the ground, and sets a minimum level. By signing it, I would be acknowledging I _intend_ to abide. | 17:43 |
| hggdh | But, by not signing it I am also -- by default -- acknowledging that I either do not know of its existence, or do not care for it. But it still binds me | 17:44 |
| hggdh | I remember the first article of the Penal Code of the country I was born in: "to nobody is given not knowing the law" | 17:46 |
| * nigelb blinks | 18:21 | |
| nigelb | hggdh: I run into you in more places :) | 18:22 |
| hggdh | nigelb: heh. I am not usually here, only came in to ask a Q | 18:22 |
| nigelb | hggdh: ah :) | 18:23 |
| czajkowski | .c | 18:24 |
| akgraner | hggdh, ignorantia iuris neminem excusat - ignorance of the law excuse no one :-) | 18:53 |
| akgraner | excuses even | 18:53 |
| nigelb | common in all legal sytems I think | 18:53 |
| hggdh | indeed | 18:55 |
| hggdh | at least on the two I know of ;-) | 18:55 |
| JanC | actually it's common in government laws, but not in the "private laws" inside schools, companies, etc. (you often have to sign that you know the rules there) | 19:58 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!