As organizers have complete power to change their own rules, they also have to take complete responsibility for the outcome.
Mar 25, 2016 · 9:31 AM UTC
1
6
9
@stilkov This contradicts the idea to accept talks based on an anonymous procedure.
2
@ewolff It does. Or you could say it’s compatible with an added AssholeDetectedException.
1
2
@moonbeamlabs It is similar in that we often make a conscious decision to not have a rule because codifying some things would be negative.
@moonbeamlabs The downside is that the system’s (hopefully benevolent) dictators can’t be held accountable for not adhering to their rules
1
@moonbeamlabs So in all fairness, the idea of not having rules is not at all compatible with the Code of Conduct efforts
1
@moonbeamlabs I agree. A CoC is a must, and the organizers should take that as well as lots of other factors into account when inviting
1
@moonbeamlabs You're right, and we thought about if and how a CoC could help attract more diverse candidates.
1
@owolf @moonbeamlabs likely that, as well as numerous other internal discussions we’ve had