[llvm-dev] Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct

[Eric Christopher via llvm-dev]

I'm going to step in here (I'm also removing Joachim from the cc line as
I'm uninterested in debating him on this subject).

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:13 PM Renato Golin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On 6 May 2016 at 22:57, Tanya Lattner <tanyalattner at llvm.org> wrote:
> > The major weapon of harassers is arguing whether something is actually
> > harassing. It is difficult to enforce a CoC if you have to have a month
> long
> > nasty argument about whether it was violated. It burns out people like
> you.
>
> The major weapon about enforcers is *not* wanting to argue.
>

A tongue in cheek description of why replying in this direction isn't
helpful: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/


> For instance, you thought Joachim was joking, I didn't. If he was
> joking, that would have been very bad taste. If he was not, that would
> have been a perfectly valid and non aggressive way to understanding
> the range of your statement.
>

Either way what Joachim said was over the line. Either he was joking about
seeking professional help which would be in bad taste and called out as
over the line. Or he was alluding to someone else needing to seek
professional help which is also very far over the line.

Taking "harassment should not be tolerated" and basically trying to find a
description of what's acceptable and not as far as harassment doesn't seem
like the right approach. I would take a step back here and realize that
ultimately all of this is about treating people fairly, with respect, and
listening to a concern if they raise it. If you try your best to do that
with everyone in the community then you don't have to worry.

Tanya voiced a concern and it needs to be taken seriously. Her quotes from
the Ada Initiative are important in understanding the context from which a
CoC comes from and how as a community we can contribute to the effort of
ensuring fair and inclusive community.

Ultimately I think we've explored this part of the thread as far as we can
go - perhaps we can go back to the discussions of earlier today?

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160507/a223fc0d/attachment.html>