Recent searches
Search options
Right or wrong, the feeling I got was that the bar for actions was just raised higher. Now it's not just the CoC committee, you also need a near unanimous vote from the TAB.
@jani @corbet @ljs @brauner I'm a bit disillusioned at the whole CoC thing - in practice, there are zero repercussions from being a jerk. Banning people from being archived/listed by lore does not prevent them from doing their work, people equating those two things are kidding themselves. Developers getting CC'ed directly generally have no idea the person is banned, and any reply will presumably be archived/listed anyway.
@axboe @jani @corbet @brauner well you might get asked to apologise (no consequences if you refuse)? And get implicit permission to turn up to LF events you're not invited to and abuse people?
Then wait a month to treat the RC process like the merge window again or something?
That's sort of a repercussion right? 
It's all a joke. Kent was the test. Failed.
Clearly defined escalating responses for repeat offenders responded to a timely manner with clear scope of case ('case still open' creates uncertainty).
Abuse of LF staff not being tolerated.
Refusal to actually do what is asked of you not tolerated.
Also - not treating only 'bad language' as a problem, but also bad behaviour using polite language.
Kent situation is very obviously egregious, it is clearly emblematic of a process fail.
Disagree re 'welcome'.