> On Jan 21, 2016, at 09:46, Derick Rethans <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> - There is no mechanism or ability for one to confront ones accuser
>
> That is a tricky one. In my opinion, in the case of abuse as pointed out
> in the draft CoC, I think this is fair, and necessary that we all for
> reports of abuse in private, and with secrecy. Without it, an accusor is
> likely immediately going to be lambasted by the perpetrator.
Here we have the core of (yet another) problem: presumption of guilt. The "accused" is
casually referred to as the "perpetrator." This is *exactly* why the accused needs to be
able to confront the accuser.
The common reply here is to say "oops, sorry, I meant to say 'the accused'". I
don't think that's true; it's a wink-and-a-nod, a recognition that one has revealed
their true thoughts: all accusations are to be believed. Except, of course, the ones that are not to
be believed, and those will (strangely enough) line up with the political beliefs of the enforcers.
Because it is a political document, the Contributor Covenant is *intended* to work that way.
That is only one of the many reasons the Contributor Covenant, and all documents like it, should be
removed in toto from any Code of Conduct discussion.
--
Paul M. Jones
[email protected]
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