[postgis-devel] Code of conduct page

[Paul Norman]

Yes, that looks good.

On 2023-05-13 11:45 p.m., Regina Obe wrote:
>
> I’ve revised that line: https://postgis.net/community/conduct/
>
> Does that look okay?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Regina
>
> *From:*Paul Norman [mailto:penorman at mac.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 14, 2023 1:44 AM
> *To:* PostGIS Development Discussion <postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org>; 
> Regina Obe <lr at pcorp.us>
> *Subject:* Re: [postgis-devel] Code of conduct page
>
> On 2023-05-12 4:52 p.m., Regina Obe wrote:
>
>     Paul has put up the new website.
>
>     https://postgis.net
>
>     I was thinking we need a code of conduct page as required by OSGeo.  I plan
>
>     to pattern it after the GEOS onehttps://libgeos.org/project/coc/   
>
>     Except
>
>     1) Of course not talking about GEOS
>
>     2) Spelling out the name in the link instead of that annoying acronym
>
>     3) Have reporting go topsc at postgis.net   (similar to what QGIS does on
>
>     theirs -
>
>     https://www.qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/codeofconduct/codeofcond
>
>     uct.html
>
>     Does anyone have issue with the above plan?
>
> The GEOS COC defines doxing as "Posting (or threatening to post) other 
> people’s personally identifying information". This has a serious issue 
> we ran into with an OpenStreetMap Carto pull request 
> <https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/4554/files/dde058f367721878e66cf5b7ee3cd72ed837b2d7#r889629148> 
> - it does not differentiate between private information and public 
> information, and disagrees with the dictionary definitions of doxing, 
> which is about publishing private information. The below quote applies 
> here
>
>     As defined here, someone posting my name and location with my
>     explicit permission would be doxxing me, and thus prohibited.
>     Additionally, some users are publicly disclose their location in
>     their profile. These users are publicising certain information
>     about themselves, and, when relevant to an issue, I see no reason
>     not to mention the information they publish.
>
>     When defining dox, Oxford and Wikipedia both include some notion
>     of the information being private and there normally being some
>     malice. The definition here has neither.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20230514/aab9b1af/attachment-0001.htm>