I agree with this CoC, think it's pretty sufficient. Thanks. Also agree with Blake, I would consider adding to the draft "Offensive comments related to..." something like "national origin, cultural affiliation", as well as "ethnicity", "language", "level of instruction". Things in which people find consists the very being of any people, perhaps could be added; any offensive comments related to the being of someone, its value. And the sort of positive acts that are welcome. I think perhaps the draft could be considered as a CoC already in use here, if it would be needed to invoke it. Any improvements or adjusts could be done on the going. Also, diversity talks lay not only in preventive instances, that instance being assured is good, lay in many subjects related to diversity of people and initiatives too.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs ________________________________ De: Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> Enviado: quinta-feira, 1 de março de 2018 15:53 Para: Blake Girardot; Paul Norman Cc: OSM Diversity Assunto: Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of Conduct & Moderation for this list Hi all, I have put the GF one as a draft on the OSM wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct Feel free to edit it as appropriate. At some point I'll go through and add the suggestions. On 28/02/18 15:27, Blake Girardot wrote: > From my perspective, and I am not sure why it is left out of > geekfeminism's policy is that item one under "Harassment includes" > should list "national origin, cultural affiliation" to address the > issue of people making offensive comments about people from > particular countries or cultures. Agreed. "national origin" has been included in anti-racism laws in the UK since the 1960s. > We might even include something like "OpenStreetMap participation > style" in that list so we do not have to tolerate disparaging remarks > about remote mappers, craft mappers, newbie mappers or folks that > participate through non-mapping contributions. Broadly in favour. Ilya Zverik said: > OpenStreetMap needs everything. More editors, more tutorials, more > > rendering styles, more mappers, more software. Anyone has something > to contribute, although most don’t know what to do. http://blog.opencagedata.com/post/openstreetmap-interview-ilya-zverev-level0 Is there a chance a broad wording could be interpreted as "Don't criticize reckless, bad faith, mapping *ever*"? 🤔 I wouldn't want that. > And I would change or add to the first line "Offensive or > disparaging comments..." because "disparaging" or "derogatory" are > open to much less debate than the very subjective "offensive". How > many endless discussions will there be (or have their been) about > what is offensive as opposed to the somewhat easier to identify, > disparaging or derogatory comment. Agreed. "offensive" is vague and can be used against marginalized people (e.g. "LGBTQ rights are offensive my sincerely held religious beliefs"). Usually I use "harmful", but those work too. On 01/03/18 19:13, Paul Norman wrote: > A couple of issues I would consider if I were doing the selection > again are readability and education or socioeconomic status. Classism is a harmful thing, so I agree we should put that in. Better readability makes it easier for non-native English speakers. Rory _______________________________________________ Diversity-talk mailing list Code of Conduct: TBD Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
_______________________________________________ Diversity-talk mailing list Code of Conduct: TBD Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
