On 12/2/06, Alan Horkan <hork...@maths.tcd.ie> wrote:

[no comment]

I'm baffled as to why the board cannot agree on this. I sincerely hope

I think in general (in the board and the community) is precisely the other way round: it's the principle of a CoC and how the CoC is being pushed what creates division while nobody has nothing against the recommendations written there.

Here is the public part of my vote in the internal discussion the board had some weeks ago:

On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 16:38 +0200, Anne Østergaard wrote:

My vote is No.

As a foundation member I gave several reasons in the debate at foundation-list.

As a board member. Leaving aside if we need a *CoC* or not, it is not a priority the board needs to push. We could push it if there would be a clear consensus in the community and there would be a general demand for a board backing. This is clearly not the case, though.

I would consider an Abstention (something different than "No opinion") if the rest of board members would have a strong feeling that a *CoC* needs to be approved and backed by the board. It's not the case. A *CoC* approved without consensus in foundation-list nor in the board is a weak *CoC*, which in a GNOME community without much abuse is IMO worse than having no *CoC* even from a pro-*CoC* point of view.

I have to say that the fact that Luis Villa (whose position I'm occupying now) showed in the foundation-list also a positioning against the *CoC* also contributes to make vote No. The debate happened during the same days Luis left the board and I joined.

I think decisions like Olav's using the *CoC* to try to prevent abuse in bugzilla make a much better favor to the *CoC* than the board voting if it's official or not.

VERY IMPORTANT: what I think the board needs to do is to look at the reasons that made Murray create that *CoC* and put specific points in oiur agenda in order to improve what is wrong in our community.