Re: Let's Do the CoC Right

>Farjad wrote
>A number of contributors have asked why we should have Coc.

>>Geoff wrote
>>I'm not sure that that's true. Several have said that they don't believe that we should, but that's not the same
thing.Everyone is entitled 
>>to their opinion. I don't think we should have one. I'm aware of the reasons why other people think we should,
>>I don't need educating,

Perhaps you haven't read all the threads. You are not the only person who has question the need for Coc.

Everyone knows people react differently when they are consulting face to face than on email. There is a need for
etiquettebut not necessarily a restrictive one.  

>>Geoff wrote
>> I believe that it's right and proper that the direction of Postgres is defined by the people who spend their time
writingit.  

But Geoff, Without knowing what problems people are facing in their businesses no product will ever stay relevant to
endusers for long.  
So everyone's problem and comment is relevant and valuable. Even though the postgresql developers obviously see a
broaderpicture and naturally have a greater say.   

Personally speaking i like to learn all the time. If it is constructive and useful I don't mind where it comes from.

We all need to approach each other in a humble learning mode. No one is trying to educate you. The fact you are taking
itthat way is only your perspective and what is wrong with learning something new?  



-----Original Message-----
From: gwinkless@gmail.com [mailto:gwinkless@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Winkless
Sent: 22 January 2016 11:21
To: FarjadFarid(ChkNet); Postgres General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Let's Do the CoC Right

On 22 January 2016 at 10:47, FarjadFarid(ChkNet) <farjad.farid@checknetworks.com> wrote:
> A number of contributors have asked why we should have Coc.

I'm not sure that that's true. Several have said that they don't believe that we should, but that's not the same thing.
Everyoneis entitled to their opinion. I don't think we should have one. I'm aware of the reasons why other people think
weshould, I don't need educating, I just believe that its overall impact will be negative or (at best) neutral. 

> Whilst we have been lucky so far. Unfortunately people behave differently when writing emails. This is because over
50%of our interactions are through body language and we don't see each other face to face. We don't really know each
other'sbackground, experience and capacities. 

So what you're saying is, email is a bad thing because we can't use our normal prejudices in advance?

> Freedom is not about saying anything we like anyway we like. For all our freedom is automatically limited by other
people'sfreedom. That's life whatever species we care to look at. 

I haven't seen anyone making the argument that they should be allowed to say whatever they want with no regard for
others.

> Simply look at the abuse some people are getting on Twitter/facebook. Even on this thread someone ,I have no doubt
unintentionallyand only because of current climate, automatically used religious connotations in replying to me. Even
thoughI am not a Muslim, I am a Baha'i. 

They did? Apologies if I missed it but the only reference I can find is that Jim said that he is religious about
postgres,which has nothing at all to do with your (or indeed his) religion. Indeed the only person who seems to be
bringingup religion (rather repeatedly) is yourself. 

> As postgresql grows even more which I sincerely hope it does. We need
> direction so we can keep the best of traditions for whoever may come on board but at the same time have the
flexibilityto change with time. 

You've given no clear evidence as to a) whether that's true or b) how a CoC will actually help to achieve that.

I believe that it's right and proper that the direction of Postgres is defined by the people who spend their time
writingit. If,  in ten years' time, some different people come along with a different vision and set of traditions,
thenthat's up to them, surely? 

Geoff