[TriLUG] Code of Conduct

[Israel J. Pattison]

Um, Tanner?  If we already have a CoC, why do we need a new one?

On 8/14/07, Tanner Lovelace <clubjuggler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/14/07, Allen Freeman <knieveltech at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > From a detached third party standpoint it appears the document in
> question IS inevitable.
> >Despite vigorous denouncement of the entire concept by a number of
> people, the
> >principals behind this document haven't blinked once and continue to
> flog editing verbiage
> >as the sole method of dispute arbitration. The general refusal to
> address the various
> >well-thought-out comments that call into question why such a document is
> even
> >necessary have been met with glib doubletalk, or (most disturbingly)
> have been ignored
> >wholesale. For myself I don't have any particular investment in the
> LUG so I'll be sitting on
> >the sidelines chuckling regardless of how this pans out. I do think
> this is a prime
> >opportunity for folks to stop and contemplate the relationship
> between Policy and
> >Bureaucracy, the nature thereof, and ask the simple question: how do
> we (members or
> >otherwise) benefit from any of this?
>
> Allen,
>
> I have yet to see many "well-thought-out comments" about why we
> shouldn't have the
> document.  The reactions all seem to fall in the range of "we're all
> adults so we don't
> need this document" to "I'm insulted that you would try to tell me
> what to do".  All
> these commenters, however, fail to even address the behavior seen on
> the list the
> past few days that shows, to me at least, the very reasons why we need
> such a
> document.  How can you sit there with a straight face, reading comments
> like
> "a complete douche" or "STFU" and tell me we don't need something like
> this?
>
> But, even then, your argument that we don't need something like this falls
> flat
> on its face because for the past 6+ years or so we *HAVE* had
> something like this!
> If you ever bothered to read the TriLUG Frequently Asked Questions
> (which I've been
> the maintainer of since *before* I was ever elected to the Steering
> Committee
> back in 2002), there are 2 sections in it that deal with members behavior.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/38qptb - What is "appropriate content" for each of
> the TriLUG lists?
> http://tinyurl.com/2jdl7o - If the lists aren't moderated, how can
> there be any rules?
>
> Those sections have been there for more than 6 years and no one has *ever*
> had any objection to them.  They predate my involvement with TriLUG
> governance.
> They are, in effect, a CODE OF CONDUCT!   As I see it, the proposed Code
> of Conduct that Matt has put forward is simply just updating what we
> already
> have.  It is not, as some would wont to put it, a "radical departure" from
> what
> the LUG has historically done.  It is not some grand conspiracy against a
> few
> people.  Is is *NOT* something the SC is trying to shove down people's
> throats!
> (If it were, they probably would have just called a vote last meeting.)
>
> Now as to your last question, "how do we as members benefit from this?",
> I still fail to see just what is wrong with the LUG coming out and
> encouraging
> people to "Be Respectful" and "Be Considerate".  Both of those things have
> been severely lacking from this thread and from many other threads in
> recent
> memory.  I would, instead, turn your question around and ask, "how will
> TriLUG
> members be harmed without this CoC?"  Phrased that way, I think it is
> obvious.
> The actions of a few can harm the greater TriLUG majority.  Yes, I think
> for
> the vast majority of TriLUG members, we don't really need the code of
> conduct,
> but if I can borrow the words of Bill Cosby: "A word to the wise ain't
> necessary -
> it's the stupid ones that need the advice."  The CoC will not suddenly
> change
> anything at all in the LUG.  It is, instead, a first step along the
> path of learning
> to get along with each other, or if not that, then just remembering to
> refrain
> from saying anything.
>
> Tanner
>
>
>
> --
> Tanner Lovelace
> clubjuggler at gmail dot com
> http://wtl.wayfarer.org/
> (fieldless) In fess two roundels in pale, a billet fesswise and an
> increscent, all sable.
> --
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>