[Linux-aus] Linux Australia Code of Conduct

[Rob Thomas]

> Lastly, seriously people, if people here found that presentation offensive,
> they have been molly cobbled too long, and need to get out more, there is
> far, FAR worse on nightly free-to-air TV. Why is it that so, because it does
> not breach the guidelines set under the Broadcast Services Act. This also
> goes for the language, same is on nightly TV.

This is where we got off target last time.  The reason _why_ someone
was disturbed or offended is NOT YOUR DAMN CONCERN.

Wether or not you think they're thin-skinned is irrelevant. The issue
is that some people were upset by it. They were expecting something
something different from what the CoC explicitly said.

Patrick Ellion-Brennan brings this up in a post immediately after this:

> See, if it wasn't aimed at sexual arousal then there's no eroticism in the material and it's sexual in orientation.

That's kinda the opposite of the way it was decided last time.
Eroticisim is a group that contains sexual, not the other way round.
However, the Pig and Duck isn't 'sexual' because it was implied HUMAN
sexuality. It's all complex isn't it.

But OK. If this is causing so many problems with people, how about
changing it from 'Sexual' to 'Sexual and/or Erotic'.

Everyone's happy then, right? And no-one will be getting nasty
surprises because the CoC was unnecessarily vague.

(Sigh. I did say on #linux.conf.au that this was going to be another
massive argument, and my prediction was correct..)

--Rob