{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/961","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/961/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/961/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/961/events","html_url":"https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/961","id":90192356,"number":961,"title":"add wording to explicitly clarify which spaces the CoC applies in","user":{"login":"shadowcat-mst","id":252821,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/252821?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst","html_url":"https://github.com/shadowcat-mst","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/shadowcat-mst/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":64,"created_at":"2015-06-22T19:43:59Z","updated_at":"2015-06-25T09:07:54Z","closed_at":"2015-06-24T18:10:55Z","pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/pulls/961","html_url":"https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/961","diff_url":"https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/961.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/961.patch"},"body":"This was originally the wording @strand and I worked out previously, which @adambeynon recently commented he thought at least the concept of was useful. It's been tweaked since though so please read the whole thread to understand where it's coming from.\r\n\r\nI'm happy to (continue to :) bikeshed the phrasing until everybody's happy - I just think we need to draw *some* sort of explicit line here.\r\n\r\n@adambeynon @sarciszewski @jaen @webmaven thoughts if you have any, please"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/comments/115176404","html_url":"https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/961#issuecomment-115176404","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/opal/opal/issues/961","id":115176404,"user":{"login":"jaen","id":227236,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/227236?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen","html_url":"https://github.com/jaen","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jaen/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-25T09:07:54Z","updated_at":"2015-06-25T09:07:54Z","body":"@meltheadorable well, I still don't see how @elia's content was bigoted - I even just checked my Collins' paperback dictionary to be sure what that means and it's not what he did - and I'm not sure why you keep using that word, but otherwise yes - you're entirely correct about the interpretation of the current wording and the fact that if @adambeynon thinks it means a), then iterating on it is not done.\r\n\r\nAs you probably noticed judging by your quote I specifically wrote down two interpretations a) and b) so people bikeshedding the wording could have an easier time getting it right.\r\nThe previous wording was strictly a) - that is you have to have two different accounts if you ever would want to state both Opal-related things and contentious opinions that could be construed as CoC violations by some - and as you can see some people like @meh and @shadowcat-mst think it's too much of a nuclear option.\r\n\r\nI'm mostly indifferent - not being able to mention something you contribute to is a small price to pay for being protected from being hounded for your opinion, but I entirely understand not wanting to make such a concession and have option b) - after all a tweet saying _I don't think <opinion on gay adoption>_ is entirely different from _Opal project thinks <opinion on gay adoption>_ or even _As an Opal contributor I don't think <opinion on gay adoption>_ - and I think wanting to have your opinions exempt unless Opal is explicitly in the tweet or it's context (inserting your gay adoption opinion in a Opal-related tweet chain) is a fair position.\r\n\r\nAnyway, I assumed @adambeynon's merge had meant that he agrees with going along with interpretation b), since I tried for it to be clear what the wording is aimed at. If he disagrees and think a) is the right interpretation, then reverting to the previous wording @shadowcat-mst proposed is probably the way to go, but since he's been amending the commit I can't give it offhand, but it read explicitly as a), if that's what you're after.\r\n\r\nIf that's not the case @adambeynon agrees with interpretation b) and @meh does, this need to continue until they work out a common ground, I suppose."}}