+1 - unfortunately, without a set policy, any infractions have to be treated arbitrarily by... well, by whom?

Having a policy eases the burden of the organizers who don't have to be forced into making one on the spot in reaction to an incident. 

-Ross. 

On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:47 PM, "Michael J. Giarlo" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi Kyle,
> 
> IMO, this is less an instrument to keep people playing nice and more an
> instrument to point to in the event that we have to take action against an
> offender.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Jon Stroop <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>> It's sad that we have to address this formally (as formal as c4l gets
>>> anyway), but that's reality, so yes, bess++ indeed, and mjgiarlo++,
>>> anarchivist++ for the quick assist.
>> 
>> This.
>> 
>> 
>>> To that end, and as a show of (positive) force--not to mention how cool
>>> our community is--I think it might be neat if we could find a way to make
>>> whatever winds up being drafted something we can sign; i.e. attach our
>>> personal names
>> 
>> Diversity and inclusiveness is a state of mind, and our individual and
>> collective actions exert that force than any policy or pledge ever could.
>> 
>> I'm hoping that things can be handled with the minimum formality necessary
>> and that if something needs to be fixed, people can just talk about it so
>> things can be made right. If we need a policy, I'm all for it. But it's
>> truly a sad day if policy rather than just being motivated to do the right
>> thing is what's keeping people playing nice.
>> 
>> kyle
>>