So you think a discussion on whether it is appropriate that CoC Ctte restricts freedom of expression is bikeshedding? Thank you for your valuable contribution! -- Igor M. On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 06:23, Daniel Braniss wrote: > > BIKE SHED SYNDROME? > > danny > PS: intentionally top posting :-) > > > On 19 May 2019, at 22:43, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > > > > On Sun, 19 May 2019 at 20:16, Warner Losh wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 11:34 AM Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sun, 19 May 2019 at 17:54, Warner Losh wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>>> Yes. There will always be limits, just like in real life. You can't tell > >>>> fire in a theater, and claim freedom of expression, for example. > >>> > >>> <snip> > >>> > >>> While that is an often cited example, it is rather tenuous as far as > >>> "freedom of expression" is concerned: yelling "Fire!" in a crowded > >>> theatre is by no measure an expression of one's views, thoughts, or > >>> opinions. At the same time, the invocation of a CoC ctte review is > >>> triggered by precisely the latter. > >> > >> > >> It is a difficult problem. The project needs to protect itself and its > >> members from harm. Sometimes, though rarely, that harm > >> comes from expressing ones views in a way that's so extreme > >> it causes real and lasting problems either for the cohesiveness > >> of the project, or its effect on the project's reputation is so > >> extreme, people can't separate the two and stop using it. There > >> needs to be a review mechanism for cases that are extreme. > > > > It's very difficult to subscribe to that view! The first problem you > > encounter is "what is an objectively extreme expression"--what is > > extreme to one, might be entirely common place to another. I'm sure > > whatever religious book one takes there is a passage that goes along > > the lines of "judge people by their deeds not by their words"... > > Secondly, the greatest legal minds in the US wrangled with that and > > came up with one answer: *ANY* expression is protected for otherwise > > it would not be "freedom." > > > > > >> At the same time, reviews are detrimental if they are triggered > >> for 'ordinary' conduct: they take time and energy away from > >> the project that could otherwise be spent on making things > >> better. The trick is to have any such review reflect the broad > >> consensus within the project of what's clearly out of bounds, > >> as well as having a fair and just response by the board in > >> the cases that require some action. > > > > > > Agreement by consensus is most dangerous, for, usually, the loudest > > wins because people with no backbone fall in-line; the best > > explanation of democracy I have ever heard was: "two wolves and a > > sheep deciding what to have for dinner!"Received on Mon May 20 2019 - 07:33:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:20 UTC