Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
People can do as they like on their own systems and resources, but when participating in the GNOME community, they should do so with respect. Refusing to exclude anyone is itself an exclusionary policy; it selects for the kind of people who will put up with absolutely anything, and excludes people who do not feel comfortable in such an environment. That creates a kind of community that I would not want to see GNOME become; there are too many of those already, because there are too many projects unwilling to kick out awful people. I suspect we might actually agree if we debated this properly, but I think you're right and we should try not to digress too much. Just to say, I probably could have worded that a bit better: An objectionable a-hole or awful person might not mean the same thing to you as it does to me, so we probably ought to be a bit careful about defining behaviours in those terms. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina! Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: ... Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Most of the time, GNOME is a great place to work and have fun, but sometimes conversations can get heated and/or personal, and the GNOME project has a collective responsibility to manage with these situations. It's important to have effective codes of conduct in place, not just to ensure that GNOME is a friendly and welcoming place, but also so that contributors feel safe from attack, and have support when things go wrong. My view is that a code of conduct needs to strike a balance between length and specificity on the one hand, and readability on the other. In the past, I have found the existing general code of conduct [1] to be too general and vague, and I think that we need something that is longer and clearer. At the same time, a code of conduct is a kind of constitutional document, and sends an important signal about the identity and character of the project, so we need to be careful about having something that seems too prescriptive and bureaucratic. It's not just the rules about conduct that are important here. One thing that we really lack are guidelines about how infringements of the code of conduct should be handled. This creates the danger that people feel unfairly treated if they are accused of breaking the code of conduct, and it opens the door to self-appointed judges taking the law into their own hands. We need to be clear about what should happen if someone breaks the code of conduct. (Who will arbitrate? What are the potential outcomes? What can you do if you disagree with the decision?) My view is that these procedures shouldn't be overly bureaucratic, and should have reconciliation and mediation as their goal, rather than punishment or excommunication. Above all, they should be independent, neutral and fair. Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
- Original Message - From: Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org To: Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com Cc: foundation-list foundation-list@gnome.org Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 1:06:49 PM Subject: Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:41:06AM -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Would you consider putting forth a concrete proposal along those lines, taking into account the models and requirements for an effective code of conduct? Yes, I'd be interested in working on a proposal for an events and community codes of conduct. Thanks to the candidates who shared their thoughts on this so far! Marina In the process, I'd also suggest extending the Applies to for the code of conduct to include not just lists, bugzilla, and specific individuals, but also conferences (such as GUADEC), IRC and other communication, and members of the Foundation and the Board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi! On Sa, 2015-05-23 at 11:41 -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? It's a complicated subject, but I echo pretty much was Alexandre said. I appreciate that we want to make people feel welcome and safe at our events. And I support that goal. I'm not convinced a detailed list of offenses, such as the GUADEC 2014 one, achieves that goal, though. Cheers, Tobi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:05:30PM +0200, Alexandre Franke wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. Except the board did ask the GUADEC 2014 attendees to sign something. There was a box that needed to be checked to register for the conference. I was talking about a hypothetical improvement to the community code of conduct, not to the conference code of conduct. For a conference code of conduct, it makes sense to require explicit assent, not least of which because when people have spent money getting to and attending an event, and they then do something sufficiently severe to warrant being excluded from that event, explicit assent helps protect the conference from further trouble that they might try to stir up as a result. That doesn't apply as much to free online communication and community resources. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. Except the board did ask the GUADEC 2014 attendees to sign something. There was a box that needed to be checked to register for the conference. -- Alexandre Franke ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, Hi, Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? First of all, it is important for people participating in the community activities, be them online (mailing list discussions, IRC, bugzilla…) or offline (GUADEC, hackfests…), to be aware that they have someone they can talk to if they need to. They should also know that suffering from attacks, or feeling like it is the case, is nothing to be ashamed of, and that they can trust the listed contacts to have a listening hear and provide an appropriate response. It is however also very important for them to feel welcome and I know that a code such as the one used for GUADEC 2014 fails to achieve that. As the organizer, I was approached by people, seasoned contributors as well as newcomers, who told me they felt uneasy because the code conveyed the message that there was a constant threat and that they should be on their guard. I share their concerns and I would feel the same way if I had to attend another event with the same code. I want to emphasize that I'm not saying there is no threat at all, and I'm taking this very seriously. What I'm saying here is that we want a positive environment. Long texts also suffer from the TL;DR (Too Long; Didn't Read) effect, and I'm convinced many people who sign up for events with a checkbox saying I have read the code of conduct and I agree to this terms actually think yada yada yada whatever, I just want to participate and I don't care/have time to read this. Some people have argued to me that it's ok since all we should care about is people signing off the code so that it can be enforced on them. This is a pretty shortsighted way of thinking and I'd say I'd rather have people read and take into account a short message without having to sign anything than them signing something they don't acknowledge and us having to take action afterwards. Another issue I have with strong codes of conduct is that often they try to substitute themselves to the appropriate authorities. There are laws and bodies whose job is to enforce them. The people in charge of a gathering should not have to list illegal activities as unacceptable. Most of us are not lawyers and have limited knowledge of the legality of such texts, even more so in an international context such as ours. We should strive to act as interfaces with the local authorities, not try to supersede them. That is of course not to say that we should call the police when the appropriate response is to call someone out on their bad behaviour, but threatening with sanctions is most of the time inappropriate too. The last point I want to cover is codes of conduct vs. their actual implementation. In many cases, organizers decide on a code of conduct but then they don't properly train the staff or take actions. If you have a look at the timeline of incidents on the geek feminist wiki, you'll find examples of such cases. I consider more important to have people willing to help and prepared than having the code itself. In fact, while I disagree with the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct and they way it was handled, I was happy to give a hand to solve issues at previous events which I helped organize. -- Alexandre Franke ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, I think we all agree we want a welcome community, and that means searching for the commune divisor and not allowing anything outside that. As far as I saw, all the previous answer from the candidates share the same opinion. I would actually like to have a code of conduct for every part of GNOME, like IRC, Bugzilla, events, etc. And I always though this one https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct is not enough. But it's true that even if I take seriously any inappropriate language or discrimination, I felt uncomfortable reading the code of conduct of GUADEC 2014, and I think we don't have to substitute law forces, because we are not. I'm thinking something more concise and shorter than the one at GUADEC 2014, with a more friendly language, but expressing a strong position and applicable to all parts of GNOME. I have in mind something like: --- In GNOME we want a friendly community and we require these points from every person involved: - Friendly and polite language. - No discrimination, and respect towards believes, race or gender. - Not inappropriate jokes, images or comments. - In doubt, be always cautious, don't assume the other person thinks like you. Always ask firsts. If you think someone misbehave on the points above described or you feel uncomfortable for any reason, even in something different than those points, don't hesitate to contact the GNOME code of conduct support team or people in charge, we will glad to talk and help you =) Any misbehavior could cause to take any actions from the GNOME code of conduct support team or the people in charge. --- Which also includes taking actions on IRC and Bugzilla towards the people that insult or shows an unfriendly behavior. I think anything else relies in the law authorities (we can't do more than just expel and ban the person, but some actions could require more), and we have to delegate to them everything that surpasses those points... A detailed code of conduct could for one part, suffer the TLDR as Alexander said, and on the other part, limit the actions GNOME can take towards misbehavior that was not thought when the code of conduct was written. i.e. The misbehaving person can say: It's written like this, so you can't take a different action than what is written. Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - | Hi, | | Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all | the work you already do for the Foundation! | | Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their | events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct | with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community | has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are | subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such | behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in | getting it addressed. | | What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the | one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly | detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? | | Thanks, | Marina | | [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption | [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Adoption | [3] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ | ___ | foundation-list mailing list | foundation-list@gnome.org | https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list | ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 05:15:29PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. I would partially agree. The purpose of the candidate QA is for prospective voters to seek out information they desire about candidates, in order to inform their vote. So, to the extent people are seeking further information specifically about the candidates and their positions, that's fine; to the extent people are looking to discuss codes of conduct in general, or start a large discussion about what GNOME should actually do, that should wait until we have the new board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
2015-05-23 17:41 GMT+02:00 Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Having a final version of the Code of Conduct (from now, CoC) for the yearly GNOME events is definitely something the new Board should look at during the next term. While we can't legally enforce anything - as we don't have the jurisdiction to do so - it's important for new and existing contributors to know what they should expect from an event the GNOME Foundation organizes. The events we promote see the participation of contributors and users from all over the world coming from different countries, religions and habits having in common their love for the GNOME platform and community. One of our duties, as Board members, is to ensure these people feel comfortable participating at the events we promote and that no harassment or other inappropriate behaviour takes place on any of these events. In addition the CoC should be the document where offended people can find a local contact to report the inappropriate behaviour they were target of. There seems to be a misunderstanding [1] on what the purpose of a CoC is and how enforceable one might be and at what level. The GNOME Foundation (or any other private organization) does not have the jurisdiction to enforce a document such as the one proposed for the GUADEC 2014 edition [2]. A breakage of the CoC does not directly result in a civil or penal sanction of any form unless the relevant legal entity (police, local law enforcement) verifies the occurrence and issues it. The same applies with a different communication channel such as the Internet where abusers might get a ban for their account or IP without receiving any other possible legal consequence. That said breaking any of the rules (I would define them as General guidelines when participating to a GNOME event) won't result in a lawsuit or other local law enforcement *unless* the behaviour is explicitly listed as in illicit (violation of a duty, obligation or generally considered as harmful for other people) from a law of the State where the event is taking place. In the case of GNOME's CoC (I'm looking at the GUADEC 2014 edition) pretty much all the offending behaviours listed there would be considered as illicit from the vast majority of countries in the world as they truly represent a menace to people's dignity, integrity and freedom and thus enforceable even by the local law enforcement. [1] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2015-May/msg00052.html [2] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ -- Cheers, Andrea Debian Developer, Fedora / EPEL packager, GNOME Infrastructure Team Coordinator, GNOME Foundation Board of Directors Secretary, GNOME Foundation Membership Elections Committee Chairman Homepage: http://www.gnome.org/~av ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:42PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? Marina linked to several resources about codes of conduct and their effectiveness; specifically, see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Code_of_conduct_evaluations . For instance, a more effective Code of Conduct should include information like For issues arising on mailing lists, IRC, or Bugzilla, contact exam...@gnome.org, who can help address issues, and if necessary, can limit or ban access to those resources. Which I would hope is simply a statement of what we'd *already* do; I'd be shocked, for instance, if the IRC channel operators or server admins have never had to ban anyone. For the record: I'm not personally looking to put forth a proposal to update the current community code of conduct; I'm simply stating that I would be quite receptive to a well-considered proposal to do so. I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. And that's the upper limit of what a Code of Conduct for a mailing list, IRC channel, Bugzilla, or other community resource should do as well: expel someone from a list, channel, Bugzilla server, etc. Nobody's talking about a document that has legal effect. While I disagree with the portion of the current CoC that says There is no official enforcement of these principles (not least of which for almost certainly being inaccurate), I agree with the this should not be interpreted like a legal document. For instance, nobody should be saying well, they're acting terribly and being disruptive, we all know it, but they're not violating the exact letter of the CoC, so my hands are tied. I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:42PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? Marina linked to several resources about codes of conduct and their effectiveness; specifically, see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Code_of_conduct_evaluations . For instance, a more effective Code of Conduct should include information like For issues arising on mailing lists, IRC, or Bugzilla, contact exam...@gnome.org, who can help address issues, and if necessary, can limit or ban access to those resources. Which I would hope is simply a statement of what we'd *already* do; I'd be shocked, for instance, if the IRC channel operators or server admins have never had to ban anyone. For the record: I'm not personally looking to put forth a proposal to update the current community code of conduct; I'm simply stating that I would be quite receptive to a well-considered proposal to do so. I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. And that's the upper limit of what a Code of Conduct for a mailing list, IRC channel, Bugzilla, or other community resource should do as well: expel someone from a list, channel, Bugzilla server, etc. Nobody's talking about a document that has legal effect. While I disagree with the portion of the current CoC that says There is no official enforcement of these principles (not least of which for almost certainly being inaccurate), I agree with the this should not be interpreted like a legal document. For instance, nobody should be saying well, they're acting terribly and being disruptive, we all know it, but they're not violating the exact letter of the CoC, so my hands are tied. OK in light of these responses, I feel I should maybe better clarify that whilst I agree this sort of stance may be a fair way to moderated communications with non-members, I do not agree with expelling card carrying members from lists, channels or servers under any circumstances. If someone has committed a *serious* breach of conduct, then the board do technically already have the power to revoke foundation membership which is the upper limit of what the board can enforce - (what’s currently lacking is a clear, transparent and fair process for that). In such *exceptional* circumstances, such privileges as access to the mailing list, IRC or git subscriptions could (in theory) justifiably be revoked under GNOME’s bylaws and California State law. However, partial exclusion of any card carrying member via an informal process could too easily become an affront to our democracy, lead to censorship, discriminatory treatment or victimisation, so therefore this is not a policy I could ever advocate, in principle. Ultimately, people have a right to be objectionable a-holes. as long as they are not infringing on anyone else’s rights in the process, in my view. I hope that better clarifies my stance on this issue. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:34:14AM +0100, Magdalen Berns wrote: OK in light of these responses, I feel I should maybe better clarify that whilst I agree this sort of stance may be a fair way to moderated communications with non-members, I do not agree with expelling card carrying members from lists, channels or servers under any circumstances. I agree that people should not lose access to resources while remaining a Foundation member. An offense serious enough to permanently lose access to those resources is an offense serious enough to revoke someone's membership in the Foundation. Let us hope that we don't ever have to put that into practice. Ultimately, people have a right to be objectionable a-holes. as long as they are not infringing on anyone else’s rights in the process, in my view. I regret that this mail is too short to fully contain the depths of my disagreement. Rather than continue an extensive debate on what is likely a fundamental point of disagreement, I'll summarize my own position on the same point, and leave the rest for some time other than the candidate QA period: People can do as they like on their own systems and resources, but when participating in the GNOME community, they should do so with respect. Refusing to exclude anyone is itself an exclusionary policy; it selects for the kind of people who will put up with absolutely anything, and excludes people who do not feel comfortable in such an environment. That creates a kind of community that I would not want to see GNOME become; there are too many of those already, because there are too many projects unwilling to kick out awful people. See also http://www.slideshare.net/dberkholz/assholes-are-killing-your-project - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, Thanks for your question! What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I hold the view that the vast majority people will consciously do their best to avoid drawing negative attention to themselves unless they feel they have support. Ideally, we want to be able to do what we can to nurture an atmosphere where members still feel free to express themselves, but also recognise that this self expression will not be supported if it comes at the direct expense of anyone else’s rights. We also want to be able to provide a concrete means of reassuring contributors that their wellbeing matters to us. I would therefore advocate that the event CoC initiative employed last year at GUADEC continue and I would also advocate taking the idea of a community CoC forward in principle too. As regards the formal community CoC idea specifically: I reckon it would likely need to contain some very considered wording to ensure it’s not left too open to subjective misinterpretation and it would probably be advisable for us to ensure we publish it along with a clear and transparent complaints policy which outlines a) how complaints are going to be handled, b) how long they are going to take to be processed, c) who is specifically responsible for dealing with them and d) what our approach to confidentiality is. Anyway, I am really pleased you have raised a debate about this and I agree that it is important. I hope that the idea gets a heathy concensus from the rest of the community too, as I would be very willing to get behind it. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. I think in the question the GNOME community vs foundation members are mixed up. Those are not the same thing. I'm a bit surprised that people see a Code of Conduct as something new. See e.g. https://mail.gnome.org/; we already expect people to follow the Code of Conduct. And before someone misunderstands, I have enforced the Code of Conduct, I've signed the existing one and agree to the thoughts behind both. This maybe my annoyance with volunteering and then getting too much do this or else.. that takes the fun out of it. I prefer assume people mean well. For lurkers: https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct -- Regards, Olav ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Olav, I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. I am not sure why you are concerned that a community code of conduct could cause legal issues for you, are you able to elaborate on that? I think in the question the GNOME community vs foundation members are mixed up. Those are not the same thing. I'm a bit surprised that people see a Code of Conduct as something new. See e.g. https://mail.gnome.org/; we already expect people to follow the Code of Conduct. Marina can correct me if I am inadvertently misrepresenting her intention here, but I think the reason she is suggestion a community code of conduct is essentially because the mailing list code of conduct is (as the name suggests) specific to the mailing list and there is also no official enforcement of those sorts of principles (nor should their be, in my view). And before someone misunderstands, I have enforced the Code of Conduct, I've signed the existing one and agree to the thoughts behind both. Which CoC are you referring to here? (there's so many in this thread now, I can't keep up! ;-)) This maybe my annoyance with volunteering and then getting too much do this or else.. that takes the fun out of it. I prefer assume people mean well. I am aware this concern exists for some members of the community about the principle of CoCs and I can sympathise with that worry too, but let's explore in context: Assuming people mean well on the mailing list is really just another way of saying don't jump to conclusions. Objectively that's a really sensible thing to suggest people to think about doing on mailing lists, since lots of people do often react without thinking on those things... However, this is about how we propose to address *serious* examples of detrimental misconduct, not trivial mailing list squabbles which members are able to resolve between themselves. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Richard, I agree, it is probably appropriate for those of us who have answered to hold off on debating about CoCs for the time being. Apologies for the noise. I'm happy to back off so other candidates can answer Marina's question. Do carry on... :D Magdalen On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I welcomed the adoption of an event code of conduct for GUADEC 2014, and I would support extending similar rules for events organized by GNOME. I don't think that all events necessarily need the same level of detail though; as an example in events that are invite-only, like hackfests, it might be overkill or not viable for the organizers to formalize a code of conduct, or have a team to enforce it. I also like to think that in such settings the social situation is less prone to incidents that require a code of conduct to resolve, as participants likely know each other already and are pre-selected. I'm more ambivalent about extending a community-wide code of conduct beyond the current one; mostly because it can be hard to determine the boundaries of the community such code would try to protect and really hard to enforce anything on some channels in practice. The current code also does not make distinction between disrespect/harassment (Be respectful and considerate, even though the word harassment is not used) and etiquette best-practices (Try to be concise), and I don't think there should be any enforcement on the latter parts. I would be interested in understanding what kind of improvements and goals you have in mind for such a community code of conduct. Cheers, Cosimo ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi, Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Thanks, Marina [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Adoption [3] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:41:06AM -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Would you consider putting forth a concrete proposal along those lines, taking into account the models and requirements for an effective code of conduct? In the process, I'd also suggest extending the Applies to for the code of conduct to include not just lists, bugzilla, and specific individuals, but also conferences (such as GUADEC), IRC and other communication, and members of the Foundation and the Board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
