Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Larry Garfield]

I like this update. It adds the things that need to be added without adding a 
ton of text, and focuses the manifesto itself while keeping the same spirit.

I will update the PR with these changes shortly.

--Larry Garfield

On Sunday, February 3, 2019 5:28:42 PM CST Margaret Staples wrote:
> I've done a lot of research in the last few years on serving
> underrepresented developers in tech community spaces, which has
> unsurprisingly included a ton of info on what's important in a CoC.
> 
> Here are the things I have turned up as important to an effective Code of
> Conduct
> (removing the bits that are only relevant to events)
> 
> Code of Conduct provides...
> 
>- a clear reporting process*
>- multiple ways to report
>- an anonymous reporting option**
>- options for reporting to humans of different gender presentations
> 
> Code of Conduct is...
> 
>- prominent on the website
>- discussed openly and supportively by leadership
> 
> Code of Conduct contains...
> 
>- clear language on expected behavior including zero tolerance for
>derogatory language about or harassment of people of color, women, LGBTQ,
> those with disabilities
>- clear language on potential consequences for bad behavior
>- clear language emphasizing intervention and safety
> 
> * this means making it clear what people can expect when/if they report.
> ** anonymous reporting means that the people empowered to manage Code of
> Conduct violations investigate concerns reported anonymously and are
> vigilant in observing anyone reported as having concerning behaviors so as
> to be able to intervene; this does not mean assuming every report is 100%
> accurate and doling out judgements and punishments in response. It is to
> enable protection of the most vulnerable - not an avenue to anonymously
> terrorize others.
> 
> Additionally, a word of warning on the perfectly understandable desire to
> emphasize positive behavior over discouraging misbehavior: this type of
> language is routinely used by those who wish to maintain the status quo of
> their empowerment to silence marginalized humans attempting to defend
> themselves.
> 
> Here's an article that looks at this issue:
> https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-incl
> usion/amp/ It focuses on the idea of "assume good intent", but it works
> similarly for all language which emphasizes nice behavior rather than
> emphasizing avoiding or correcting harmful behavior.
> 
> I have taken the proposed CoCs and modified them to be inline with the
> content standards. I hope you find this feedback helpful.
> 
> Conduct
> 
> All individuals involved with FIG either in an official capacity
> (Secretary, Core Committee, Project Representative, Editor, or Working
> Group member) or informally (such as participating in discussions) are
> expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times. All
> individuals are expected to behave in a manner consistent with the slightly
> modified Code Manifesto included below.
> 
> In the case of an individual holding a formal position, bad behavior may
> result in a Recall or Expulsion Vote may be called to remove the individual
> in question. In the case of any individual, any two Secretaries may issue a
> formal warning to the individual in question or issue a temporary or
> permanent ban from all FIG-related communication channels, as appropriate
> to the situation.
> 
> The Editor and Sponsor of a Working Group may jointly remove any member of
> the Working Group for failure to abide by the behavior guidelines at any
> time.
> 
> Concerning behavior may be reported publicly in any thread, privately to
> any Secretary, to the relevant Working Group Editor or Sponsor, or
> anonymously by emailing secretar...@php-fig.org
> 
> Modified Code Manifesto
> 
> We want to work in an ecosystem that empowers developers to reach their
> potential--one that encourages growth and effective collaboration. A space
> that is safe for all.
> 
> A space such as this benefits everyone that participates in good faith. It
> encourages new developers to enter our field. It is through discussion and
> collaboration that we grow, and through growth that we improve.
> 
> In the effort to create such a place, we hold to these values:
> 
>1. *Discrimination harms us*. This includes discrimination, derogatory
>language, or harassment on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation,
> disability, age, nationality, technology and any other arbitrary
> designation of a group of people.
>2. *Boundaries honor us*. Your comfort levels are not everyone’s comfort
>levels. Remember that, and if brought to your attention, heed it.
>3. We are our biggest assets. None of us were born masters of our trade.
>Each of us has been helped along the way. Return that favor when you can,
> and be respectful of others' place in their journey.
>4. *Respect defines us*. Treat others with respect and 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Stefano Torresi]

This is great, Margaret, thanks! Spot on!

Il giorno lun 4 feb 2019 alle ore 19:30 Matthew Weier O'Phinney <
mweierophin...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Margaret —
>
> Thank you, thank you, thank you for sharing your findings and your
> proposed changes. I think these look wonderful: everything is clearly
> spelled out in terms of what is not allowed, how and who to report to, and
> what will happen.
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:28 PM Margaret Staples <
> margaret.stap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've done a lot of research in the last few years on serving
>> underrepresented developers in tech community spaces, which has
>> unsurprisingly included a ton of info on what's important in a CoC.
>>
>> Here are the things I have turned up as important to an effective Code of
>> Conduct
>> (removing the bits that are only relevant to events)
>>
>> Code of Conduct provides...
>>
>>- a clear reporting process*
>>- multiple ways to report
>>- an anonymous reporting option**
>>- options for reporting to humans of different gender presentations
>>
>> Code of Conduct is...
>>
>>- prominent on the website
>>- discussed openly and supportively by leadership
>>
>> Code of Conduct contains...
>>
>>- clear language on expected behavior including zero tolerance for
>>derogatory language about or harassment of people of color, women, LGBTQ,
>>those with disabilities
>>- clear language on potential consequences for bad behavior
>>- clear language emphasizing intervention and safety
>>
>> * this means making it clear what people can expect when/if they report.
>> ** anonymous reporting means that the people empowered to manage Code of
>> Conduct violations investigate concerns reported anonymously and are
>> vigilant in observing anyone reported as having concerning behaviors so as
>> to be able to intervene; this does not mean assuming every report is 100%
>> accurate and doling out judgements and punishments in response. It is to
>> enable protection of the most vulnerable - not an avenue to anonymously
>> terrorize others.
>>
>> Additionally, a word of warning on the perfectly understandable desire to
>> emphasize positive behavior over discouraging misbehavior: this type of
>> language is routinely used by those who wish to maintain the status quo of
>> their empowerment to silence marginalized humans attempting to defend
>> themselves.
>>
>> Here's an article that looks at this issue:
>> https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/amp/
>> It focuses on the idea of "assume good intent", but it works similarly for
>> all language which emphasizes nice behavior rather than emphasizing
>> avoiding or correcting harmful behavior.
>>
>> I have taken the proposed CoCs and modified them to be inline with the
>> content standards. I hope you find this feedback helpful.
>>
>> Conduct
>>
>> All individuals involved with FIG either in an official capacity
>> (Secretary, Core Committee, Project Representative, Editor, or Working
>> Group member) or informally (such as participating in discussions) are
>> expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times. All
>> individuals are expected to behave in a manner consistent with the slightly
>> modified Code Manifesto included below.
>>
>> In the case of an individual holding a formal position, bad behavior may
>> result in a Recall or Expulsion Vote may be called to remove the individual
>> in question. In the case of any individual, any two Secretaries may issue a
>> formal warning to the individual in question or issue a temporary or
>> permanent ban from all FIG-related communication channels, as appropriate
>> to the situation.
>>
>> The Editor and Sponsor of a Working Group may jointly remove any member
>> of the Working Group for failure to abide by the behavior guidelines at any
>> time.
>>
>> Concerning behavior may be reported publicly in any thread, privately to
>> any Secretary, to the relevant Working Group Editor or Sponsor, or
>> anonymously by emailing secretar...@php-fig.org
>>
>> Modified Code Manifesto
>>
>> We want to work in an ecosystem that empowers developers to reach their
>> potential--one that encourages growth and effective collaboration. A space
>> that is safe for all.
>>
>> A space such as this benefits everyone that participates in good faith.
>> It encourages new developers to enter our field. It is through discussion
>> and collaboration that we grow, and through growth that we improve.
>>
>> In the effort to create such a place, we hold to these values:
>>
>>1. *Discrimination harms us*. This includes discrimination,
>>derogatory language, or harassment on the basis of race, gender, sexual
>>orientation, disability, age, nationality, technology and any other
>>arbitrary designation of a group of people.
>>2. *Boundaries honor us*. Your comfort levels are not everyone’s
>>comfort levels. Remember that, and if brought to your attention, 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Matthew Weier O'Phinney]

Margaret —

Thank you, thank you, thank you for sharing your findings and your proposed
changes. I think these look wonderful: everything is clearly spelled out in
terms of what is not allowed, how and who to report to, and what will
happen.

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:28 PM Margaret Staples 
wrote:

> I've done a lot of research in the last few years on serving
> underrepresented developers in tech community spaces, which has
> unsurprisingly included a ton of info on what's important in a CoC.
>
> Here are the things I have turned up as important to an effective Code of
> Conduct
> (removing the bits that are only relevant to events)
>
> Code of Conduct provides...
>
>- a clear reporting process*
>- multiple ways to report
>- an anonymous reporting option**
>- options for reporting to humans of different gender presentations
>
> Code of Conduct is...
>
>- prominent on the website
>- discussed openly and supportively by leadership
>
> Code of Conduct contains...
>
>- clear language on expected behavior including zero tolerance for
>derogatory language about or harassment of people of color, women, LGBTQ,
>those with disabilities
>- clear language on potential consequences for bad behavior
>- clear language emphasizing intervention and safety
>
> * this means making it clear what people can expect when/if they report.
> ** anonymous reporting means that the people empowered to manage Code of
> Conduct violations investigate concerns reported anonymously and are
> vigilant in observing anyone reported as having concerning behaviors so as
> to be able to intervene; this does not mean assuming every report is 100%
> accurate and doling out judgements and punishments in response. It is to
> enable protection of the most vulnerable - not an avenue to anonymously
> terrorize others.
>
> Additionally, a word of warning on the perfectly understandable desire to
> emphasize positive behavior over discouraging misbehavior: this type of
> language is routinely used by those who wish to maintain the status quo of
> their empowerment to silence marginalized humans attempting to defend
> themselves.
>
> Here's an article that looks at this issue:
> https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/amp/
> It focuses on the idea of "assume good intent", but it works similarly for
> all language which emphasizes nice behavior rather than emphasizing
> avoiding or correcting harmful behavior.
>
> I have taken the proposed CoCs and modified them to be inline with the
> content standards. I hope you find this feedback helpful.
>
> Conduct
>
> All individuals involved with FIG either in an official capacity
> (Secretary, Core Committee, Project Representative, Editor, or Working
> Group member) or informally (such as participating in discussions) are
> expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times. All
> individuals are expected to behave in a manner consistent with the slightly
> modified Code Manifesto included below.
>
> In the case of an individual holding a formal position, bad behavior may
> result in a Recall or Expulsion Vote may be called to remove the individual
> in question. In the case of any individual, any two Secretaries may issue a
> formal warning to the individual in question or issue a temporary or
> permanent ban from all FIG-related communication channels, as appropriate
> to the situation.
>
> The Editor and Sponsor of a Working Group may jointly remove any member of
> the Working Group for failure to abide by the behavior guidelines at any
> time.
>
> Concerning behavior may be reported publicly in any thread, privately to
> any Secretary, to the relevant Working Group Editor or Sponsor, or
> anonymously by emailing secretar...@php-fig.org
>
> Modified Code Manifesto
>
> We want to work in an ecosystem that empowers developers to reach their
> potential--one that encourages growth and effective collaboration. A space
> that is safe for all.
>
> A space such as this benefits everyone that participates in good faith. It
> encourages new developers to enter our field. It is through discussion and
> collaboration that we grow, and through growth that we improve.
>
> In the effort to create such a place, we hold to these values:
>
>1. *Discrimination harms us*. This includes discrimination, derogatory
>language, or harassment on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation,
>disability, age, nationality, technology and any other arbitrary
>designation of a group of people.
>2. *Boundaries honor us*. Your comfort levels are not everyone’s
>comfort levels. Remember that, and if brought to your attention, heed it.
>3. We are our biggest assets. None of us were born masters of our
>trade. Each of us has been helped along the way. Return that favor when you
>can, and be respectful of others' place in their journey.
>4. *Respect defines us*. Treat others with respect and 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Lukas Kahwe Smith]

+100

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 12:28 AM Margaret Staples
 wrote:
>
> I've done a lot of research in the last few years on serving underrepresented 
> developers in tech community spaces, which has unsurprisingly included a ton 
> of info on what's important in a CoC.
>
> Here are the things I have turned up as important to an effective Code of 
> Conduct
> (removing the bits that are only relevant to events)
>
> Code of Conduct provides...
>
> a clear reporting process*
> multiple ways to report
> an anonymous reporting option**
> options for reporting to humans of different gender presentations
>
> Code of Conduct is...
>
> prominent on the website
> discussed openly and supportively by leadership
>
> Code of Conduct contains...
>
> clear language on expected behavior including zero tolerance for derogatory 
> language about or harassment of people of color, women, LGBTQ, those with 
> disabilities
> clear language on potential consequences for bad behavior
> clear language emphasizing intervention and safety
>
> * this means making it clear what people can expect when/if they report.
> ** anonymous reporting means that the people empowered to manage Code of 
> Conduct violations investigate concerns reported anonymously and are vigilant 
> in observing anyone reported as having concerning behaviors so as to be able 
> to intervene; this does not mean assuming every report is 100% accurate and 
> doling out judgements and punishments in response. It is to enable protection 
> of the most vulnerable - not an avenue to anonymously terrorize others.
>
> Additionally, a word of warning on the perfectly understandable desire to 
> emphasize positive behavior over discouraging misbehavior: this type of 
> language is routinely used by those who wish to maintain the status quo of 
> their empowerment to silence marginalized humans attempting to defend 
> themselves.
>
> Here's an article that looks at this issue: 
> https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/amp/
>  It focuses on the idea of "assume good intent", but it works similarly for 
> all language which emphasizes nice behavior rather than emphasizing avoiding 
> or correcting harmful behavior.
>
> I have taken the proposed CoCs and modified them to be inline with the 
> content standards. I hope you find this feedback helpful.
>
> Conduct
>
> All individuals involved with FIG either in an official capacity (Secretary, 
> Core Committee, Project Representative, Editor, or Working Group member) or 
> informally (such as participating in discussions) are expected to conduct 
> themselves in a professional manner at all times. All individuals are 
> expected to behave in a manner consistent with the slightly modified Code 
> Manifesto included below.
>
> In the case of an individual holding a formal position, bad behavior may 
> result in a Recall or Expulsion Vote may be called to remove the individual 
> in question. In the case of any individual, any two Secretaries may issue a 
> formal warning to the individual in question or issue a temporary or 
> permanent ban from all FIG-related communication channels, as appropriate to 
> the situation.
>
> The Editor and Sponsor of a Working Group may jointly remove any member of 
> the Working Group for failure to abide by the behavior guidelines at any time.
>
> Concerning behavior may be reported publicly in any thread, privately to any 
> Secretary, to the relevant Working Group Editor or Sponsor, or anonymously by 
> emailing secretar...@php-fig.org
>
> Modified Code Manifesto
>
> We want to work in an ecosystem that empowers developers to reach their 
> potential--one that encourages growth and effective collaboration. A space 
> that is safe for all.
>
> A space such as this benefits everyone that participates in good faith. It 
> encourages new developers to enter our field. It is through discussion and 
> collaboration that we grow, and through growth that we improve.
>
> In the effort to create such a place, we hold to these values:
>
> Discrimination harms us. This includes discrimination, derogatory language, 
> or harassment on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, 
> age, nationality, technology and any other arbitrary designation of a group 
> of people.
> Boundaries honor us. Your comfort levels are not everyone’s comfort levels. 
> Remember that, and if brought to your attention, heed it.
> We are our biggest assets. None of us were born masters of our trade. Each of 
> us has been helped along the way. Return that favor when you can, and be 
> respectful of others' place in their journey.
> Respect defines us. Treat others with respect and compassion unless they 
> abuse that trust. Make your discussions, criticisms and debates from a 
> position of respect for the humanity of all involved. Ask yourself, is it 
> true? Is it necessary? Is it constructive? Anything less is missing the mark.
> Reactions require grace. Angry responses are 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Margaret Staples]

I've done a lot of research in the last few years on serving
underrepresented developers in tech community spaces, which has
unsurprisingly included a ton of info on what's important in a CoC.

Here are the things I have turned up as important to an effective Code of
Conduct
(removing the bits that are only relevant to events)

Code of Conduct provides...

   - a clear reporting process*
   - multiple ways to report
   - an anonymous reporting option**
   - options for reporting to humans of different gender presentations

Code of Conduct is...

   - prominent on the website
   - discussed openly and supportively by leadership

Code of Conduct contains...

   - clear language on expected behavior including zero tolerance for
   derogatory language about or harassment of people of color, women, LGBTQ,
   those with disabilities
   - clear language on potential consequences for bad behavior
   - clear language emphasizing intervention and safety

* this means making it clear what people can expect when/if they report.
** anonymous reporting means that the people empowered to manage Code of
Conduct violations investigate concerns reported anonymously and are
vigilant in observing anyone reported as having concerning behaviors so as
to be able to intervene; this does not mean assuming every report is 100%
accurate and doling out judgements and punishments in response. It is to
enable protection of the most vulnerable - not an avenue to anonymously
terrorize others.

Additionally, a word of warning on the perfectly understandable desire to
emphasize positive behavior over discouraging misbehavior: this type of
language is routinely used by those who wish to maintain the status quo of
their empowerment to silence marginalized humans attempting to defend
themselves.

Here's an article that looks at this issue:
https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/amp/
It focuses on the idea of "assume good intent", but it works similarly for
all language which emphasizes nice behavior rather than emphasizing
avoiding or correcting harmful behavior.

I have taken the proposed CoCs and modified them to be inline with the
content standards. I hope you find this feedback helpful.

Conduct

All individuals involved with FIG either in an official capacity
(Secretary, Core Committee, Project Representative, Editor, or Working
Group member) or informally (such as participating in discussions) are
expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times. All
individuals are expected to behave in a manner consistent with the slightly
modified Code Manifesto included below.

In the case of an individual holding a formal position, bad behavior may
result in a Recall or Expulsion Vote may be called to remove the individual
in question. In the case of any individual, any two Secretaries may issue a
formal warning to the individual in question or issue a temporary or
permanent ban from all FIG-related communication channels, as appropriate
to the situation.

The Editor and Sponsor of a Working Group may jointly remove any member of
the Working Group for failure to abide by the behavior guidelines at any
time.

Concerning behavior may be reported publicly in any thread, privately to
any Secretary, to the relevant Working Group Editor or Sponsor, or
anonymously by emailing secretar...@php-fig.org

Modified Code Manifesto

We want to work in an ecosystem that empowers developers to reach their
potential--one that encourages growth and effective collaboration. A space
that is safe for all.

A space such as this benefits everyone that participates in good faith. It
encourages new developers to enter our field. It is through discussion and
collaboration that we grow, and through growth that we improve.

In the effort to create such a place, we hold to these values:

   1. *Discrimination harms us*. This includes discrimination, derogatory
   language, or harassment on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation,
   disability, age, nationality, technology and any other arbitrary
   designation of a group of people.
   2. *Boundaries honor us*. Your comfort levels are not everyone’s comfort
   levels. Remember that, and if brought to your attention, heed it.
   3. We are our biggest assets. None of us were born masters of our trade.
   Each of us has been helped along the way. Return that favor when you can,
   and be respectful of others' place in their journey.
   4. *Respect defines us*. Treat others with respect and compassion unless
   they abuse that trust. Make your discussions, criticisms and debates from a
   position of respect for the humanity of all involved. Ask yourself, is it
   true? Is it necessary? Is it constructive? Anything less is missing the
   mark.
   5. *Reactions require grace*. Angry responses are valid, but neither
   abusive language nor harmful actions are acceptable. If something happens
   which concerns you, address it directly or report it, but be 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Chuck Burgess]

Looking over both the manifesto and the covenant, I didn't really notice
anything that would conflict between the two, if we wanted to simply
include *both*... doing so would just be presenting an intersection of
their requirements.  Is that too much verbiage overall?  Maybe just link to
both, since they are standalone entities (that seem to be versioned, or at
least versionable)?  Stating that we want to abide by both, then
delineating how those in FIG positions can act to enforce, ... maybe that
would cover the concerns mentioned?
CRB
*about.me/ashnazg *


On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 7:54 AM Larry Garfield 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 20:42, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 2:49 AM Lukas Kahwe Smith <
> sm...@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:17 AM Larry Garfield <
> la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> > >>  >
> > >>  > Greetings, FIGians.
> > >>  >
> > >>  > This has been bounced around in back channels on and off for a
> while, so I think it's finally time to make it official. I propose that we
> officially adopt the Code Manifesto[1] as our official standard of behavior.
> > >>  >
> > >>  > Specifically, as follows:
> > >>  >
> > >>  > https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/pull/1143
> > >>  >
> > >>  > WHY?
> > >>  >
> > >>  > First off, I want to be clear that I am NOT making this
> recommendation in response to any current issue. I am not aware of any
> current issue that would require invoking or even discussing invoking the
> guidelines listed here. FIG has been delightfully boring in that regard for
> quite some time and, "good lord willin' and the creek don't rise", it will
> stay that way.
> > >>  >
> > >>  > That of course is the best time to discuss such matters, as they
> can be looked at from a reasonably objective and dispassionate perspective.
> The definition of expected behavior of current official FIG members is
> quite vague and wishy washy (by design), and having clearer up-front
> expectations is good should the need ever arise.
> > >>  >
> > >>  > WHY THE MANIFESTO?
> > >>  >
> > >>  > A number of organizations and projects have of late adopted the
> "Contributor Covenant" as their code of conduct. My concern with the
> Covenant is that it is a very negative document; in contrast, the Manifesto
> provides guidelines of good behavior rather than an enumeration of bad
> behavior. In my experience, a positive document tends to encourage the
> desired behavior better than a negative one.
> > >>
> > >>  We had a brief discussion on this point via IRC a few days ago. While
> > >>  such a document is a very small step forward, I personally think that
> > >>  the manifesto lack of naming problematic behavior is its biggest
> > >>  weakness, since it does very little to assure people that you are
> > >>  willing to name problematic behavior when it occurs, when you cannot
> > >>  even do so in the rules you publish.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I tend to agree with Lukas here, and have a bit of background to share.
> > >
> > > A few years ago, Zend Framework adopted Code Manifesto to govern our
> projects, for many of the same reasons Larry has stated: we like the
> emphasis on positive guidelines of acceptable behaviour over an enumeration
> of punishments for bad behaviour.
> > >
> > > In practice, it's been problematic, for a number of reasons.
> > >
> > > When unacceptable behaviour is observed, there's no clear contact to
> report to. This leaves people either waiting and hoping somebody will step
> in, or leaving the conversation to avoid the person.
> > >
> > > Additionally, when somebody does step in (generally somebody with
> moderation rights in whichever community forum the interactions are
> occurring on), there's then questions:
> > >
> > > - What behaviour was observed? How is it against the code?
> > > - What direction should be provided to the user to prevent future
> issues?
> > > - Is banning necessary? If so, how long? Should it ever be permanent?
> > >
> > > Essentially, a code without an explicit process for calling out
> violations and dealing with them makes addressing problems entirely
> subjective and at the whim of those with moderation powers.
> > >
> > > In terms of reporting, reporting MUST be able to be done anonymously,
> to prevent retribution by the accused against the accuser; people who abuse
> the rules are simply more likely to retaliate. Without this, members of the
> community have no safe way to report that prevents further abuse.
> > >
> > > In sum: I love the Code Manifesto as a guideline for how people
> > should interact within the community. However, it's not a code of
> > conduct; a code of conduct needs to outline the specific behaviours
> > that will trigger actions, how to report these safely, and what actions
> > may be taken. These are required to ensure a safe and fair process.
> > for a 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Larry Garfield]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 20:42, Matthew Weier O'Phinney 
>  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 2:49 AM Lukas Kahwe Smith  
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:17 AM Larry Garfield  
> >> wrote:
> >>  >
> >>  > Greetings, FIGians.
> >>  >
> >>  > This has been bounced around in back channels on and off for a while, 
> >> so I think it's finally time to make it official. I propose that we 
> >> officially adopt the Code Manifesto[1] as our official standard of 
> >> behavior.
> >>  >
> >>  > Specifically, as follows:
> >>  >
> >>  > https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/pull/1143
> >>  >
> >>  > WHY?
> >>  >
> >>  > First off, I want to be clear that I am NOT making this recommendation 
> >> in response to any current issue. I am not aware of any current issue that 
> >> would require invoking or even discussing invoking the guidelines listed 
> >> here. FIG has been delightfully boring in that regard for quite some time 
> >> and, "good lord willin' and the creek don't rise", it will stay that way.
> >>  >
> >>  > That of course is the best time to discuss such matters, as they can be 
> >> looked at from a reasonably objective and dispassionate perspective. The 
> >> definition of expected behavior of current official FIG members is quite 
> >> vague and wishy washy (by design), and having clearer up-front 
> >> expectations is good should the need ever arise.
> >>  >
> >>  > WHY THE MANIFESTO?
> >>  >
> >>  > A number of organizations and projects have of late adopted the 
> >> "Contributor Covenant" as their code of conduct. My concern with the 
> >> Covenant is that it is a very negative document; in contrast, the 
> >> Manifesto provides guidelines of good behavior rather than an enumeration 
> >> of bad behavior. In my experience, a positive document tends to encourage 
> >> the desired behavior better than a negative one.
> >>  
> >>  We had a brief discussion on this point via IRC a few days ago. While
> >>  such a document is a very small step forward, I personally think that
> >>  the manifesto lack of naming problematic behavior is its biggest
> >>  weakness, since it does very little to assure people that you are
> >>  willing to name problematic behavior when it occurs, when you cannot
> >>  even do so in the rules you publish.
> >>  
> > 
> > I tend to agree with Lukas here, and have a bit of background to share.
> > 
> > A few years ago, Zend Framework adopted Code Manifesto to govern our 
> > projects, for many of the same reasons Larry has stated: we like the 
> > emphasis on positive guidelines of acceptable behaviour over an enumeration 
> > of punishments for bad behaviour.
> > 
> > In practice, it's been problematic, for a number of reasons.
> > 
> > When unacceptable behaviour is observed, there's no clear contact to report 
> > to. This leaves people either waiting and hoping somebody will step in, or 
> > leaving the conversation to avoid the person.
> > 
> > Additionally, when somebody does step in (generally somebody with 
> > moderation rights in whichever community forum the interactions are 
> > occurring on), there's then questions:
> > 
> > - What behaviour was observed? How is it against the code?
> > - What direction should be provided to the user to prevent future issues?
> > - Is banning necessary? If so, how long? Should it ever be permanent?
> > 
> > Essentially, a code without an explicit process for calling out violations 
> > and dealing with them makes addressing problems entirely subjective and at 
> > the whim of those with moderation powers.
> > 
> > In terms of reporting, reporting MUST be able to be done anonymously, to 
> > prevent retribution by the accused against the accuser; people who abuse 
> > the rules are simply more likely to retaliate. Without this, members of the 
> > community have no safe way to report that prevents further abuse.
> > 
> > In sum: I love the Code Manifesto as a guideline for how people 
> should interact within the community. However, it's not a code of 
> conduct; a code of conduct needs to outline the specific behaviours 
> that will trigger actions, how to report these safely, and what actions 
> may be taken. These are required to ensure a safe and fair process.
> for a reporting process we last year adopted this in the Symfony 
> community
> https://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code_of_conduct/reporting_guidelines.html
> 
> It is partially derived from the Sunshine PHP conference process, which 
> in turn derived it from others.
> 
> One key aspect here is also the CARE team, which also received training 
> in receiving reports. Now given the limited number of people that 
> participate with FIG, compared to the rather large number in the 
> Symfony community, a CARE team equivalent is probably unrealistic. That 
> being said, I kind think it would be awesome of there would be such a 
> “response team as a service” because the same thing 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Lukas Kahwe Smith]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 20:42, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <
mweierophin...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 2:49 AM Lukas Kahwe Smith 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:17 AM Larry Garfield 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Greetings, FIGians.
>> >
>> > This has been bounced around in back channels on and off for a while,
>> so I think it's finally time to make it official.  I propose that we
>> officially adopt the Code Manifesto[1] as our official standard of behavior.
>> >
>> > Specifically, as follows:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/pull/1143
>> >
>> > WHY?
>> >
>> > First off, I want to be clear that I am NOT making this recommendation
>> in response to any current issue.  I am not aware of any current issue that
>> would require invoking or even discussing invoking the guidelines listed
>> here.  FIG has been delightfully boring in that regard for quite some time
>> and, "good lord willin' and the creek don't rise", it will stay that way.
>> >
>> > That of course is the best time to discuss such matters, as they can be
>> looked at from a reasonably objective and dispassionate perspective.  The
>> definition of expected behavior of current official FIG members is quite
>> vague and wishy washy (by design), and having clearer up-front expectations
>> is good should the need ever arise.
>> >
>> > WHY THE MANIFESTO?
>> >
>> > A number of organizations and projects have of late adopted the
>> "Contributor Covenant" as their code of conduct.  My concern with the
>> Covenant is that it is a very negative document; in contrast, the Manifesto
>> provides guidelines of good behavior rather than an enumeration of bad
>> behavior.  In my experience, a positive document tends to encourage the
>> desired behavior better than a negative one.
>>
>> We had a brief discussion on this point via IRC a few days ago. While
>> such a document is a very small step forward, I personally think that
>> the manifesto lack of naming problematic behavior is its biggest
>> weakness, since it does very little to assure people that you are
>> willing to name problematic behavior when it occurs, when you cannot
>> even do so in the rules you publish.
>>
>
> I tend to agree with Lukas here, and have a bit of background to share.
>
> A few years ago, Zend Framework adopted Code Manifesto to govern our
> projects, for many of the same reasons Larry has stated: we like the
> emphasis on positive guidelines of acceptable behaviour over an enumeration
> of punishments for bad behaviour.
>
> In practice, it's been problematic, for a number of reasons.
>
> When unacceptable behaviour is observed, there's no clear contact to
> report to. This leaves people either waiting and hoping somebody will step
> in, or leaving the conversation to avoid the person.
>
> Additionally, when somebody does step in (generally somebody with
> moderation rights in whichever community forum the interactions are
> occurring on), there's then questions:
>
> - What behaviour was observed? How is it against the code?
> - What direction should be provided to the user to prevent future issues?
> - Is banning necessary? If so, how long? Should it ever be permanent?
>
> Essentially, a code without an explicit process for calling out violations
> and dealing with them makes addressing problems entirely subjective and at
> the whim of those with moderation powers.
>
> In terms of reporting, reporting MUST be able to be done anonymously, to
> prevent retribution by the accused against the accuser; people who abuse
> the rules are simply more likely to retaliate. Without this, members of the
> community have no safe way to report that prevents further abuse.
>
> In sum: I love the Code Manifesto as a guideline for how people should
> interact within the community. However, it's not a code of conduct; a code
> of conduct needs to outline the specific behaviours that will trigger
> actions, how to report these safely, and what actions may be taken. These
> are required to ensure a safe and fair process.
>
for a reporting process we last year adopted this in the Symfony community
https://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code_of_conduct/reporting_guidelines.html

It is partially derived from the Sunshine PHP conference process, which in
turn derived it from others.

One key aspect here is also the CARE team, which also received training in
receiving reports. Now given the limited number of people that participate
with FIG, compared to the rather large number in the Symfony community, a
CARE team equivalent is probably unrealistic. That being said, I kind think
it would be awesome of there would be such a “response team as a service”
because the same thing applies to many other communities .. as just because
you are small doesn’t things cannot happen yet when something happens its
important that people know how to deal with it properly.

regards,
Lukas
-- 
regards,
Lukas

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 

Re: Proposal: Adopt Code Manifesto

[Lukas Kahwe Smith]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:17 AM Larry Garfield  wrote:
>
> Greetings, FIGians.
>
> This has been bounced around in back channels on and off for a while, so I 
> think it's finally time to make it official.  I propose that we officially 
> adopt the Code Manifesto[1] as our official standard of behavior.
>
> Specifically, as follows:
>
> https://github.com/php-fig/fig-standards/pull/1143
>
> WHY?
>
> First off, I want to be clear that I am NOT making this recommendation in 
> response to any current issue.  I am not aware of any current issue that 
> would require invoking or even discussing invoking the guidelines listed 
> here.  FIG has been delightfully boring in that regard for quite some time 
> and, "good lord willin' and the creek don't rise", it will stay that way.
>
> That of course is the best time to discuss such matters, as they can be 
> looked at from a reasonably objective and dispassionate perspective.  The 
> definition of expected behavior of current official FIG members is quite 
> vague and wishy washy (by design), and having clearer up-front expectations 
> is good should the need ever arise.
>
> WHY THE MANIFESTO?
>
> A number of organizations and projects have of late adopted the "Contributor 
> Covenant" as their code of conduct.  My concern with the Covenant is that it 
> is a very negative document; in contrast, the Manifesto provides guidelines 
> of good behavior rather than an enumeration of bad behavior.  In my 
> experience, a positive document tends to encourage the desired behavior 
> better than a negative one.

We had a brief discussion on this point via IRC a few days ago. While
such a document is a very small step forward, I personally think that
the manifesto lack of naming problematic behavior is its biggest
weakness, since it does very little to assure people that you are
willing to name problematic behavior when it occurs, when you cannot
even do so in the rules you publish.

regards,
Lukas

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP 
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAEFKHaFx4d-oxTa2DQhbYVWYyL8gNZ6JZXyrivTRX%3DFeSJkc1g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.