On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:21 PM, James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com> wrote:
Now, you may say that (2) would be rejected by the committee, but I would
counter that it's still a stain on me and something that will forever appear
along side my name in search results and that the amount of time and
stress it'd take me to defend myself would make my voluntarily leaving
the community, which would be seen as an admission of guilt, my only
option.
If you had read the policy, you would know that wouldn't happen as reports and details of reports are to be kept confidential.
That doesn't mean I won't be strung along and it doesn't mean that the attacker can't release those details. Remember, I'm worried
about politically motivated attacks, and attacks meant to silence opposing viewpoints, not legitimate instances of harassment.
Sure, but an attacker can do that now. Having the CoC doesn't change anything there, though it does give us a framework to deal with it.
People are shitheads. People are assholes. We're not agreeing to join
some organization and sign an ethics clause when signing up for the mailing
list. The current moderators can already remove bad actors from the list.
How they act outside of the list is non of this list's concern.
The lists are just one of many different ways people in this community interact.
So? We interact with people outside of specific groups all the time. Baring specific
agreements to the contrary, why should any one group claim responsibility of my
personal business?
If that business is publicly bringing the project into disrepute, or harassing other community members and they approach us about it, then it becomes our business.
If it's unrelated to PostgreSQL, then it's your personal business and not something the project would get involved in.