On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 10:04 PM, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > A CoC has to pull a kind of double > duty: be friendly enough to digest for a newcomer and also be helpful to > project organizers to make tough balancing decisions. We don't have to > expect each sentence to pull that double duty on its own. I don't quite know > what the phrasing would be (because, again, we don't run conferences), but I > think we could make a statement that explicitly disclaims that we will be > using "viewpoint diversity" to provide a platform for viewpoints > antithetical to the CoC. > > None of these categorizations listed should be interpreted as > get-out-of-jail-free cards for otherwise unwelcoming behavior, and I think > maybe we should be explicit about that. Our diversity statement is an > aspiration, not a suicide pact. Religion, neurotype, national origin, and > subculture (4chan is a subculture, God help us), at minimum, are all items > on that list that I have personally seen used to justify shitty behavior. > Political belief is far from unique (nor the most common excuse, in my > experience) in that list. But they all deserve to be on that list. I want > the somewhat fringy progressive hacktivist to feel comfortable here as well > as people more mainstream.
This all seems very sensible to me. In personal projects I use the WeAllJS CoC, because I think it does a good job of giving clear guidance on behavior and non-scary enforcement examples, while also avoiding legalism and being clear that trying to game the rules won't work. It might be a good source of inspiration here: https://github.com/WeAllJS/weallbehave/blob/latest/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion