"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> On 01/12/2016 02:43 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> To me, this reads more like the document itself. I hope I have
>> done justice to Josh's points as well as Tom's, although I would
>> bet there are a number of people on the list that can improve on my
>> effort here.
> I read your whole document. It is not badly written and I would agree it
> does read a bit more like a lot of the CoCs out there. My critique would
> be that it adds words for the sake of adding words. The more words the
> more ambiguity and the more nits to pick.
> As we have all appeared to coalesce around v5, I would suggest that we
> stick with it or gently modify v5 up to the point that it is something
> that sticks.
Um, you may have coalesced around v5, but I'm not sure there's consensus
there. I agree with Kevin that his version looks a lot more like a real
CoC. His is surely still amenable to some editing, but there are also
things in your version that we can do without. Particularly the "not
about being offended" line. That's pretty defensive and unwelcoming,
IMO, and that isn't the image we want to project here.
regards, tom lane
