Hi all, As I have stated previously, I find the Contributor Covenant text objectionable, in that it couples person, project, and politics, so that the person becomes answerable to the project for their politics. If there simply must be a code of conduct, they should be decoupled. To that end, I propose that the entire "Code Of Conduct Text" in the RFC be removed, and replaced with this single sentence: We are committed to evaluating contributions within project channels without regard to the contributor's experience, ability, identity, body, religion, politics, or activity outside of project channels. Alternatively, if that's not specific enough, use this single sentence instead: We are committed to evaluating contributions within project channels (such as reporting issues, posting feature requests, updating documentation, submitting pull requests or patches, and other project activities) without regard to the contributor's level of experience, gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality, politics, or activity outside of project channels. Both of these use language cribbed from the Contributor Covenant, and add explicit protections for politics and other activity outside the project. This decouples person, politics, and project from each other, leaving each with its own separate sphere of influence. It also removes the scope of resulting actions-to-be-taken from the expectations of conduct, and leaves it to the conflict resolution language. The replacement is restricted to project channels only. I predict, based on earlier comments, that some will object to this. I opine that it is beyond the scope of the project to either reward or punish members for their activity outside channels owned by the project. Even so, conflict in non-project channels does occur. As such, I suggest adding the following text (or substantially similar text) to the conflict resolution language: Q: What about conflict outside of project channels? A: If you feel conflict via a non-project channel is unbearable, you should handle the incident(s) using the means provided by that channel. For example: - If you feel you are being abused via Twitter, you might block or mute the person(s) you feel are abusing you, and/or report the abuse to Twitter. - If you feel you are being harassed via email, you could set up a rule to delete or junk emails from the person(s) you feel are harassing you. - If you feel you are subject to a credible threat of physical harm, you should report it to law enforcement. Finally, although the original RFC text does not define "project spaces", I think that "project channels" should be defined; for example, the official PHP accounts on Github, Twitter, and Facebook, as well as all php.net mailing lists, and perhaps even all php.net email accounts. -- Paul M. Jones pmjones88@gmail.com http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php



