[python-committers] I have blocked Wes Turner from the Python org on GitHub

[Paul Moore]

On 1 April 2017 at 19:35, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> From what people have said in opposition to what I did, I think we need to
> have a discussion about two things:
>
> 1. Is it a CoC violation if someone chooses to ignore repeated warnings that
> their communication style is unproductive and thus a waste of people's time?
> And if people don't view it as an explicit CoC violation, do we still view
> it as enough reason to block someone but under a different name? (I
> obviously view it as a CoC violation.)

In my view, it would be better described as a "moderation action" (or
something similar). There's a lot of implication when codes of conduct
get involved - the high profile cases tend to be about genuinely
unacceptable behaviour such as harassment, and so it's easy for people
who only hear about what happened second hand, to read more into the
situation than is maybe present.

> 2. What is the exact procedure someone has to follow to instigate a ban (and
> this policy should probably cover GitHub, mailing lists, and anywhere else
> someone can be banned)? Is it having two core devs agree to the ban and it
> being publicly stated here (as MAL suggested)? Whatever approach we choose
> we should write it down in the devguide somewhere.

I agree we should write the process down. My suggestion would be that
the process as described by Nick (which is what you actually followed)
be described as how we deal with people who have demonstrated an
inability to work effectively with the community ("Moderation" is the
best term I can come up with for this process, but I don't think it's
ideal). The Code of Conduct process should (IMO) be reserved for
immediate exclusion of people who have demonstrated inappropriate
behaviour, and it should be very much a last resort action, and
require consensus between a number of core devs to institute.

> As for Wes himself, I'm fine with the ban lasting only a couple months (say
> the end of May?). Based on the positive feedback I received on the ban I
> don't want to just drop it without at least some time passing to get the
> point across that something needs to change, but I also don't expect the ban
> to be permanent since there wasn't any malicious intent.

Just to be clear, I'm completely fine with the action you took with
regard to Wes. I can confirm that it's something that's been coming
for some time (I've interacted with Wes on a number of lists), and I
appreciate the fact that you took the hard decision and actually did
something. I'm just uncomfortable with describing it as a Code of
Conduct issue (which as Alex says, is typically associated more with
harassment and abuse).

Paul