Sam,
you are conflating the concerns. This is not ON/OFF logic, with a possibly
more than one dimension of shading and positioning one (relatively extreme)
case as the norm for how to interact, is not the way to deal with this.
(analogy; "Person killed in traffic. Ban all cars.")
Niclas
On Thu,
Agreed with Sam.
Saying "ignore it" ensures our communities will only be made up of people
who are hardy enough or privileged enough to be able to ignore such things.
We're not enforcing people's feelings of safety. Nor are we enforcing
people's happiness. Of course, we could never do that. They
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> 3. IGNORE IT
>
> You don't have to read what other people write, you don't have to
> internalize it and you may convince others to do the same. For 20 years,
> this was the number one defense against trolls and
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 6:54 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Okay, back to the topic.
>
Ok, good.
> Perhaps we should update the code of conduct. It seems that a lot of the
> unease here relates to the nature of our planned responses to conduct
> infractions.
>
That is one part,
Okay, back to the topic.
Perhaps we should update the code of conduct. It seems that a lot of the
unease here relates to the nature of our planned responses to conduct
infractions.
I can tell you how I see it, as one of the people behind the work that went
into our code of conduct.
There are
This is the last email I am going to send on the specifics of me not liking
the response I got on this thread. I have a follow-up email that will
hopefully get us back on topic.
Here's an excerpt of what you chose to email me privately:
> Now, you have claimed that you have been suffering from
Not sure how we got here. I wasn't suggesting we update our code of conduct.
Niclas was attacking the concept of "safety", so I was providing a concrete
example of someone (me) who does not feel safe.
Niclas’s response is an example of the sort of thing that has contributed
to me not feeling
On 11/15/16, 9:03 AM, "Patricia Shanahan" wrote:
>That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
>write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
>in e-mails.
Personally, I don't think "rules", "standards" and "policies" are in play
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> ...
>> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
>> you don't actively
That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
in e-mails.
On 11/15/2016 8:56 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
What I am looking for is an example of behavior that is permitted by the
current code of
What I am looking for is an example of behavior that is permitted by the
current code of conduct but that could be prohibited by a practical,
enforceable set of rules.
On 11/15/2016 8:28 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
this
What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
this context.
We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread already. I
was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to provide
proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to
On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
...
You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing list,
saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of
Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
...
> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
> you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
> others!
...
+1.
We have at least
If someone in an org I cared about told me they had to take a break for
over a year because it was too damaging for their emotional health I would
be extremely alarmed. My first response would be more to the tune of "oh
wow, I'm so sorry, that's so awful."
I certainly would not immediately jump
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Noah,
> ASF has not gotten to where it is by generalizations and abstractions of
> nonexistent issues. Whenever anyone brings up a hypothetical, be it in
> Legal or Membership quorums, the response is that we deal with
Noah,
ASF has not gotten to where it is by generalizations and abstractions of
nonexistent issues. Whenever anyone brings up a hypothetical, be it in
Legal or Membership quorums, the response is that we deal with it when
there are actual usecases.
I am asking for examples, some type of record to
Again this is not the world we occupy. There is no litmus test for who can
join our lists and participate. Safety remains a priority that needs to be
addressed- not for the majority, but for those occasional cases where it can
and does take place here.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 14, 2016,
Please forgive my ignorance on the matter, but isn't this a prestigious
Open Source software Foundation?
For such top engineers you think you would have less safety concerns.
Perhaps this is the Linux foundation's influence on the ASF?
Perhaps Schneier can comment on your seeming "Culture of
I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
Positioning *war* as the
On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga wrote:
>
>> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
>> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer
>> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga wrote:
> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer
> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the results.
>
>
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Joan Touzet wrote:
> ...I will note that CouchDB's Code of Conduct came first, and in fact was
> the model for the Apache Code of Conduct...
Yes, sorry that I omitted to mention that - big thanks to CouchDB for this!
-Bertrand
- Original Message -
> From: "Bertrand Delacretaz"
>
> Note that in the meantime there's
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct - IMO it's better
> if projects use that one, and if needed contribute improvements to
> it.
I will note that CouchDB's
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Some things we did on CouchDB...
>... - Create a Code of Conduct...
Note that in the meantime there's
https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct - IMO it's better
if projects use that one, and if needed contribute
Some things we did on CouchDB that I think could work for other projects:
- Started a lot of discussions (some private, some public) regarding
people's conduct on IRC, bug trackers, mailing lists etc (moving people to
a more "yes, and" culture, encouraging friendly and open communication,
Hi Everyone
It's been a while since my last update as I've been away. I'm now starting to
pick things up again so please see below for a brief update.
*Women in Big Data*
The WIBD group asked for a speaker to present to their members in the San
Francisco area. Kathy Saunders responded and this
27 matches
Mail list logo