I'm not arguing for an exception for unacceptable behavior, but I am saying that we need to be cognizant of a few issues:
1. Whereas the Code of Conduct presumes that most behavior is done with full knowledge and intent, we cannot really assume that. We can't assume that if someone is behaving in a way that we dislike, that it must be purposeful. 2. We can't assume that in all cases, someone is able to modify some behavior just because they're aware of it. 3. If the purpose of a code of conduct is to increase diversity, then it should focus on correction and inclusion, rather than shame and exclusion. The current mailing list CoC proposes public shaming and a "three strikes" rule. Based on messages I'm getting off list from people who seem afraid to speak up, this is concerning people, but they do not want to be seen as being against the process in general. I share this concern. As an aside, how can those people who seem to be leading this CoC process make those people feel safe enough to speak on their own? 4. Understanding and utilizing the communication channels involved is really important here. A mailing list can allow someone to be moderated, whereas you can't moderate someone at an event. At the same time, you can be more strict on a mailing list about being on topic, not having a social (or sexual) component to the discussion, etc. 5. We must also allow for cultural differences. What is acceptable and normal in San Fransisco is going to be different from what's normal and acceptable in Jakarta. We need to allow for tweaks and changes to reflect local culture and mores. - Serge _______________________________________________ diversity-talk mailing list diversity-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/diversity-talk
