Thank you for all your input on the proposal. Regardless of whether this motion passes or not, having such an open discussion is already a net win over what we had in the past 
.
Moving the responsibility somewhere else
The main critique about the proposal seems to be that it doesnāt directly suggest an alternative to where the responsibility for handling conduct issues should go in the future.
Thatās true, but a unfortunately a consequence of our current situation within the PSF. I would have loved to move the responsibility for handling such cases to the PSF Board, but the PSF conduct processes are (and have been for a long while) in a completely broken state, so this was not an option at this point.
As I mentioned in the message I linked to at in the OP, this proposal is a small part of a much larger list of changes I would like to suggest to get the PSF back on track and better set up for fulfilling its mission.
So for the time being, my suggestion is to start fixing things with smaller patches until we have a better idea of where things are moving with the PSF and what the relation between the core developers and the PSF should be going forward.
Moving the responsibility to the core developers
Since the SC will no longer be in charge of handling CoC cases, my suggestion is to have these handled by the group of core developers themselves. In the open, on this forum and between us.
If we find that we need to take extreme actions such as bans or even ejections from the core membership, we can have a vote among the core developers and then collectively ask the SC to implement any needed actions.
Our group is small enough that we can easily handle this and having such deliberations in the open is better than the current opaque approach the PSF is taking with CoC questions.
Formalizing core developer votes
We may want to formalize this process in PEP 13 by adding core developer motions and votes (these are often called āproposals by the membersā and āgeneral assembly votesā in other orgs) as a way for the core developers to take action on things which we find important enough, but that would go into a separate proposal, with a separate patch to PEP 13.
My personal take on handling conduct issues
Overall, and in my experience, I believe that open communication, tolerance, professional mediation and asking people to tone down in discussions is a much better approach to handling these things, than everything thatās being interpreted into codes of conducts.
You donāt create a welcoming atmosphere by pointing people to methods of punishment. Itās smiling faces, passion, joy and offering help without reward, that creates a welcoming atmosphere.
Just to clarify: Iām not a perfect citizen in Python land either. I have a very direct way of expressing my thoughts, which people may find offensive at times. I usually try to let people know upfront and ask them to be just as open when approaching me. IMO, clarifying misunderstandings and agreeing to disagree are key concepts for useful interactions. And if this takes a longer email or forum thread to accomplish this, thatās perfectly fine.
BTW: This proposal is not something which was triggered by Timās temporary ban. Iāve been trying to get people to understand that we need a better approach for many many years. The ban just reminded me of perhaps starting another attempt.
Next steps
I will send out an email to all voting core developers (our āgeneral assemblyā) today and point them to this topic, so that they are aware that a poll is coming up.
This may also require adding a few more people to this sub-forum. Iāll point them to the moderators to get the arranged.
Iāll open the poll sometime on Sunday. Itāll then close automatically the Sunday AoE two weeks later and show the results.
Thanks.