[Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

[Matthew Brett]

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Stefan van der Walt
<stefanv at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> On August 3, 2018 09:50:38 Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 11:01 PM Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <looks back> Nope, concision is definitely not my strength. But I hope I
>>> made the argument clear, at least.
>>
>>
>> No, wait. I got it:
>>
>> Bad actors use "diversity of political beliefs" in bad faith as cover for
>> undermining the goals of the diversity statement. Marginalized groups want
>> more assurance that our community (1) isn't one of those bad actors and (2)
>> is willing and capable of resisting those bad actors when they come.
>
>
> That's a very useful summary; thank you.
>
> I think we can fairly easily add a sentence that encourages participation
> from a wide diversity of people, while making it clear that including
> someone in the conversation does not give them free reigns in contradiction
> with the rest of the guidelines.
>
> Ralf, if you agree, shall we do this for SciPy, and use the new version for
> NumPy too?

I must say, I disagree.  I think we're already treading close to the
edge with the current document, and it's more likely we'd get closer
still with virtually any addition on this line.   I'm in favor of
keeping the political beliefs in there, on the basis it's really not
too hard to distinguish good-faith political beliefs, and the current
atmosphere is so repellent to people who would not identify as
progressive, that I would like them to feel they have some protection.
If you will not allow me "no change" and you offered me a) paragraph
by group of the not-discriminated trying to imagine something
comforting to imagined extremely sensitive and progressive (name your
other group here) or b) no stated defense for not-progressive persons,
I'd take b).

Cheers,

Matthew