That Code of Conduct

[Graham Todd]

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 18:09:25 -0600
"Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard at earthlink.net> uttered these words:

> One may live for years in a neighborhood and yet not be part of
> the community, even if one /does/ communicate with others about him.
> 
> In fact, there is a local fellow who none in our community would claim
> and who /does/ participate in local talk but does /not/ belong.  He's
> a renter, donchaknow.
[snipped]

Here in the UK, we would say that anybody who lived in our geographical
area *was* a member of our community.  We would not describe him as an
active member of our community unless he was known for actively
undertaking activities which further the interests of our community.

I don't understand your remarks about being a "renter", unless its to
indicate that the "local fellow" rents his own accommodation.  In my
community, it has been conservatively estimated that 85% of the people
live in houses that are rented, and those who own as well as those who
rent their homes are still part of "our community".  Or perhaps this is
a cultural difference that we have with those more westwards across the
Atlantic over the concept.

There are all kinds of communities, not just geographic.  This is an
online community, a "virtual community" that brings together people
from different countries with possibly different cultural norms.  It
needs some guidelines or rules to prevent it descending into chaos and
splitting it apart.  On the user at Ubuntu.com list, I would say anyone who
offers help - technical or otherwise - and can be shown to do that over
a protected length of time (3 months?) becomes an active member of the
online community, not just a passive one.

As this list does not operate on the same basis, anyone who regularly
contributes to a thread in a manner which doesn't contravene the
guidelines or rules is an active member of this community.  However,
you or I have to be aware assumptions which you or I hold as the norm
may not apply in a different country or legislative area, and may
cause offence.  The basis of our community is an interest in computers,
more specifically Ubuntu, and causing offence should not be allowed
although every issue about computers and Ubuntu should be allowed
unless it causes offence.

For that reason, I should like the two lists moderated more keenly.
All the talk about "thought police" and "net nazis" that I see
occasionally in lists is incomprehensible to me.  There should be
minimal rules and I believe they should be enforced, not just result in
"guidelines". That is how my local sports club works: I accept the
rules when I join this particular community of interest, and I believe
others should as well.

Perhaps as a first step those who run the list ought to send explicit
information about what is allowed or not allowed, when anyone first
joins and for old hands when emails can be sent.

-- 
Graham Todd