On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:01 AM, James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm sorry for the double post.
>
> > If you read the reporting guidelines, it is requested that someone
> filing a
> report provides as much evidence as possible, and that is a really
> important provision, both for the person reporting and for the committee
> to review and adjudicate fairly.
>
> What does fairly mean?
>
> Let's role play. I'll be a homophobic person.
>
> You've just submitted a proposal suggesting that we change master-master
> replication to be multi-partner replication. I've told you I don't like the
> wording because of it's implication of supporting homosexual marriage,
> which I believe to be a personal offense to me, my marriage, and my "deeply
> held religious beliefs". You tell me that's not your intent and that you do
> not plan to change your proposed wording. You continue to use the term in
> all correspondences on the list and I continually tell you that supporting
> gay marriage is offensive and that you need to not be so deeply offensive.
> I submit all our correspondences to the CoC committee and complain that
> you're purposely using language that is extremely offensive.
>
> What is a "fair" outcome? Should you be banned? Should you be forced to
> change the wording of your proposal that no one else has complained about
> and others support? What is a fair, just outcome?
>
> Jim
God I love you , Jim!! Again, just roleplaying of course. :-)