Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Terry Reedy]

On 9/21/2018 6:55 AM, Christian Heimes wrote:


I don't understand why you are drawing the reverse conclusion here. Can
you give me one concrete example, in which a French, German, or any
other non-US American taboo was violated and not counteracted with swift
reaction?


Are you talking about someone posting a non-American 'taboo' word in the 
native language or an English translation thereof?

___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Alexander Belopolsky]

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:07 AM Antoine Pitrou  wrote:

>
> I don't know of specifically French linguistic taboos, so I'm unable to
> answer this.  French culture generally doesn't ban words wholesale, even
> when used in quotes.  The very idea that you can't *quote* something
> despicable is foreign here.
>

Russian has a handful of taboo word and a long tradition of censoring them,
but most of such words have no English equivalent, so you won't see them in
this forum.

BTW, the "n-word" exists in Russian and is not a taboo, so like Antoine I
have to trust the moderators on the graveness of the offense of spelling it
out.  Still, this whole discussion reminds me an old Russian joke: "A
lesson in a kindergarten: ... and now, children, let's recite the words
that you should never use."
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Paul Moore]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 21:37, Antoine Pitrou  wrote:
>
>
> Apparently it's this one:
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2018-September/053482.html
>
> By the way, regardless of this single case, I would like people to think
> of the broader issue we're having.  It's more than a single contentious
> decision.

Before I say anything else, I want to point out that (a) I'm not
objecting to the ban, or the process that took place to impose it, and
(b) I'm extremely appreciative of the work our moderators put into
trying to police things in an increasingly difficult environment. So
please take anything I say in that context - as perspective from
someone who is concerned about the direction that certain of our
groups are taking, but understands that it's not an easy problem to
solve.

But in the interest of looking at the broader issue (which I agree
with Antoine is something we should be concerned about)...

I understand that the taboo in question is a strong one in American
culture, and as such violating that is inconsiderate and insensitive.
Doing so deliberately is both unacceptable, and a cheap form of debate
(if giving offense is the only way you have to make your point, maybe
your point's not good enough?) But it is still very much one culture's
position, and American sensibilities often seem to be very clear and
present in a lot of the debates we see that "get out of hand" in one
way or another. I'm British (and my age may also be relevant - I grew
up in the 1960s and 70s), and from my perspective, it feels like a lot
of people are over-sensitive, and very quick to perceive offense - to
the extent that entirely natural (to many British people) and accepted
tones, like sarcasm and irony, are almost impossible to express
without having to completely obscure meaning by adding clarifications
and explanations.

I'll also comment on the point made here, can anyone point to a
non-American taboo that has been violated and hasn't been dealt with
the same way? Not really, but in my case that's because I don't think
the British *have* strong taboos like that (and Antoine indicates that
the same is true of the French). The only thing I can think of is
religious taboos, such as Muslim concerns about taking the name of the
Prophet in vain, but I don't think I've ever seen that sort of
violation (and I would expect that to be dealt with just as swiftly).
Personally, as a Catholic, arguing religious taboos on a list about a
language based on Monty Python feels ironic anyway - but for the
record, please don't ban references to the Spanish Inquisition or the
Holy Grail on my account :-)

Openness needs to be a two way street, in my view. Certainly people
from cultures that have a more "robust" (shall we say) natural form of
expression need to be aware that other cultures and people may not be
able to deal with that - but conversely, people from cultures with a
strong sense of certain words and expressions being unacceptable need
to be open to the fact that others don't have that sense, and expect
thicker skins in debate. That's not how I see the Python community
going at the moment - rather we're moving towards a "lowest common
denominator" approach, where *everyone* needs to skirt around all
possible forms of offense, and the person claiming to be offended is
in effect always in the right. That, to me, is taking the easy option,
and I think that the Python community should aspire to do something
better than that, even if it's hard.

The internet in general is a hugely beneficial technology, allowing us
to interact with people in radically different cultures and situations
than we were ever able to in the past. That's a massive step forward
for humanity as a whole in understanding each other - and we shouldn't
undermine it by putting up barriers to communication in the form of
preventing people from making (and learning from) dumb social
mistakes.

As things stand, everyone is living in fear of giving offense. As an
example, some time ago, I was participating in a discussion where some
participant made a comment that I thought was a bit out of line with
the list's policy,. It didn't bother me, personally, at all (as I say,
I'm British :-)) but rather than let it lie, I felt that I should
mention this, rather than leave it to someone else. However, what
ended up happening was that I got a lot of criticism for "taking
offense unnecessarily". (I don't have a link, and I don't want to
provide one - it's an example, not something I feel the need to
analyze further). So rather than *helping*, I ended up being the bad
guy simply from trying to channel other people's views and getting it
wrong. And I ended up with a strong sense that everyone viewed me as
the sort of over-sensitive complainer that I try very, very hard not
to be.

When I write mails for the lists, it's an exhausting process. The
technical content is easy, but policing my own tone against an
increasingly complex and restrictive set of standards that 

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Antoine Pitrou]

Le 21/09/2018 à 13:06, Christian Heimes a écrit :
> 
> In my opinion it's both wrong and unfair to compare the ban with
> Anatoly's ban. For one we didn't have a process and general consent for
> bans.

AFAIK we still don't.  I don't know where such a procedure is written
out, and I don't remember my opinion being asked or considered on the
matter.  I certainly don't remember consenting to immediate permanent
bans as a response to use of culture-specific taboos (rather than actual
insults or racist discourse).

As it is, the current "process" is vague and privately decided.  That's
not an acceptable standard on a mature project.

>
 It took us a while to agree on the procedure. Also Anatoly wasn't
> flat out hostile and insulting. He was mentally draining and exhausting
> on a more subtle level.

Yeah... no, not so subtle.  You're painting things in a rosy colour
here.  He had been a problem for months or years.  It was obvious
something had to be done.  But apparently the "key people" were
reluctant to take a decision, even though there was frequent outrage at
Anatoly's contributions.  Now we're facing the inverse problem: the "key
people" feel like they have to take overhanded decisions extremely
quickly, as if it was going to make the atmosphere more peaceful (which,
by construction, it won't).

> Participation on these mailing lists is a
> privilege, not a right. We grant the privilege to everybody, but also
> reserve the right to remove the privilege.

"Privilege" is a weird way to describe volunteer labour.

Regards

Antoine.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Antoine Pitrou]

Le 21/09/2018 à 12:55, Christian Heimes a écrit :
> On 21/09/2018 12.46, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>
>> Le 21/09/2018 à 02:06, Nathaniel Smith a écrit :
>>> Now sure, that taboo is an American thing, and I wouldn't support
>>> automatically banning someone who used it in genuine ignorance, was
>>> repentant when they realized what they'd done, etc.
>>
>> So why are American taboos specifically forbidden, and not other taboos?
>>  Is there anything special about Americans that deserves this?  Does it
>> mean that Python is a community for Americans foremost, and others are
>> just second-class participants?  The more this is going on, the more it
>> is the impression I get, and things have become distinctly *worse* recently.
> 
> I don't understand why you are drawing the reverse conclusion here. Can
> you give me one concrete example, in which a French, German, or any
> other non-US American taboo was violated and not counteracted with swift
> reaction?

I don't know of specifically French linguistic taboos, so I'm unable to
answer this.  French culture generally doesn't ban words wholesale, even
when used in quotes.  The very idea that you can't *quote* something
despicable is foreign here.

But, were it to exist, I have a hard time imagining it would face
immediate permanent banning on python-XXX.  And I would be against such
immediate permanent banning, because that's inappropriately strong and
definitive.

Regards

Antoine.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Christian Heimes]

On 20/09/2018 22.25, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm choosing to forward this to python-committers because I don't think
> python-ideas is a reasonable place to discuss CoC decisions.
> 
> I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
> mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:
> 
> - a definitive ban is an extremely strong decision that should only be
> taken if nothing else works.  May I remind that Anatoly was able to post
> prolifically and unconstructively for several years, being warned
> several times, before being finally banned?  Comparatively, this one ban
> seems expeditive.

In my opinion it's both wrong and unfair to compare the ban with
Anatoly's ban. For one we didn't have a process and general consent for
bans. It took us a while to agree on the procedure. Also Anatoly wasn't
flat out hostile and insulting. He was mentally draining and exhausting
on a more subtle level.

I'm all in favor to ban people from python-dev or python-ideas for
deliberate misuse and insults. Participation on these mailing lists is a
privilege, not a right. We grant the privilege to everybody, but also
reserve the right to remove the privilege.

Brett, Titus, I support your decision.

Christian
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Donald Stufft]

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 6:55 AM, Christian Heimes  wrote:
> 
> I don't understand why you are drawing the reverse conclusion here. Can
> you give me one concrete example, in which a French, German, or any
> other non-US American taboo was violated and not counteracted with swift
> reaction?

Right, I would assume that if someone knowingly posted a similar post, but 
using say a French taboo, the same would have happened. The key thing is that 
the author obviously *knew* it was a taboo, it wasn’t an accident. If someone 
accidentally posted something like that, then I presume the outcome would be 
something more like a warning and telling them not to do it again— for any 
culture’s taboo.___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Christian Heimes]

On 21/09/2018 12.46, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> Le 21/09/2018 à 02:06, Nathaniel Smith a écrit :
>> Now sure, that taboo is an American thing, and I wouldn't support
>> automatically banning someone who used it in genuine ignorance, was
>> repentant when they realized what they'd done, etc.
> 
> So why are American taboos specifically forbidden, and not other taboos?
>  Is there anything special about Americans that deserves this?  Does it
> mean that Python is a community for Americans foremost, and others are
> just second-class participants?  The more this is going on, the more it
> is the impression I get, and things have become distinctly *worse* recently.

I don't understand why you are drawing the reverse conclusion here. Can
you give me one concrete example, in which a French, German, or any
other non-US American taboo was violated and not counteracted with swift
reaction?
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Antoine Pitrou]

Le 21/09/2018 à 02:06, Nathaniel Smith a écrit :
> Now sure, that taboo is an American thing, and I wouldn't support
> automatically banning someone who used it in genuine ignorance, was
> repentant when they realized what they'd done, etc.

So why are American taboos specifically forbidden, and not other taboos?
 Is there anything special about Americans that deserves this?  Does it
mean that Python is a community for Americans foremost, and others are
just second-class participants?  The more this is going on, the more it
is the impression I get, and things have become distinctly *worse* recently.

Regards

Antoine.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Ethan Furman]

On 09/20/2018 05:47 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:


Which is why I'm hoping we can eventually get a clear enforcement guide written 
for all the mailing lists and then have
a specific group of people manage all of these incident reports and deciding 
how to handle them for consistency.
Otherwise we have our current situation where every list admin has to figure 
this out for themselves and do the best
they can on their own.



conduct-wg at python.org.


I'll start running issues from -list by them to get advice/counsel.  No reason 
we can't opt-in to consistency.  :)

--
~Ethan~
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Brett Cannon]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 15:35 Ethan Furman  wrote:

> On 09/20/2018 02:17 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> > I will also say I didn't voice an opinion or participate in the
> discussion on the conduct WG when deciding how to handle
> > it (beyond outlining our levels of escalation when handling these
> situations).
>
> One thing missing from the ban notification is the length of time?  If
> this is the first offense it should only be two
> months, right?
>

The request was for a permanent ban based on the severity and calculated
infraction that it was. (And we have always been clear on the list that we
reserved the right to skip steps based on severity, so this is not a change
in policy.)


>
> And I have to argue against his use of the n-word* as being part of the
> reason -- he wasn't calling anybody that, he was
> using the word as an example of a taboo in one culture that is not in
> others.  Using that as part of the reason to ban
> him helps me understand the sentiment voiced at the sprints of the feeling
> that the CoC is a weapon waiting to shoot us
> down.
>
> I fully appreciate the frustration of trying to moderate these lists with
> our limited tools, but we still need to be
> careful of the reasons we use for moderation actions.
>

Which is why I'm hoping we can eventually get a clear enforcement guide
written for all the mailing lists and then have a specific group of people
manage all of these incident reports and deciding how to handle them for
consistency. Otherwise we have our current situation where every list admin
has to figure this out for themselves and do the best they can on their own.

And it's all stuff I'm bringing up in the WG, but I also have to stop
drowning in conduct issues before I can put in the emotional energy to even
have that conversation.

I already lost sleep last night over having to institute this ban knowing
there was a strong chance of a backlash based on how things have been going
as of late. And I now dread reading my personal email, half-expecting there
to be yet another issue I have to go deal with. At the current rate I'm
going I will have to do my month-long volunteer detox in October which I
really don't want to do as that's probably when we are going to discuss
governance proposals and I want to participate in those discussions, but I
also would rather bow out of those than burn out entirely.

And I quickly want to say thanks to everyone who has checked in with me to
ask how I'm doing and offering to somehow help (which my answer to the
latter is "get the Discourse test instance up"). And thanks to Mariatta,
Zach, and anyone else who have been leading on GitHub and bugs.python.org
where people are still acting out.


> Does the CoC WG have an email address?  I'm happy to forward my concerns
> to them about their decision.
>

conduct-wg at python.org.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Ethan Furman]

On 09/20/2018 05:06 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:



And I have to argue against his use of the n-word* as being part of the
reason -- he wasn't calling anybody that, he was using the word as an
example of a taboo in one culture that is not in others.  Using that as part
of the reason to ban him helps me understand the sentiment voiced at the
sprints of the feeling that the CoC is a weapon waiting to shoot us down.


But using that word, even with quote marks around it, *is* a serious
taboo in American culture. And partly this is because "white person
who finds convoluted excuse to use the n-word" is such a cliche that
the affected folks have given up with arguing about it and just don't
want to hear it anywhere, in or out of quotes, with or without an
excuse attached. There's no reservoir of good-faith left to fall back
on.

Now sure, that taboo is an American thing, and I wouldn't support
automatically banning someone who used it in genuine ignorance, was
repentant when they realized what they'd done, etc. Context absolutely
matters. But in context here it's clear that Jacco knew perfectly well
that he was violating a taboo, and I can't read his usage as anything
but an intentional provocation. Especially when combined with all the
other things in his email.


You make good points.  -Ideas is not, after all, a sociology course, and he did 
already know that.

I withdraw my objection.

--
~Ethan~

___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Ethan Furman  wrote:
> And I have to argue against his use of the n-word* as being part of the
> reason -- he wasn't calling anybody that, he was using the word as an
> example of a taboo in one culture that is not in others.  Using that as part
> of the reason to ban him helps me understand the sentiment voiced at the
> sprints of the feeling that the CoC is a weapon waiting to shoot us down.

But using that word, even with quote marks around it, *is* a serious
taboo in American culture. And partly this is because "white person
who finds convoluted excuse to use the n-word" is such a cliche that
the affected folks have given up with arguing about it and just don't
want to hear it anywhere, in or out of quotes, with or without an
excuse attached. There's no reservoir of good-faith left to fall back
on.

Now sure, that taboo is an American thing, and I wouldn't support
automatically banning someone who used it in genuine ignorance, was
repentant when they realized what they'd done, etc. Context absolutely
matters. But in context here it's clear that Jacco knew perfectly well
that he was violating a taboo, and I can't read his usage as anything
but an intentional provocation. Especially when combined with all the
other things in his email.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Chris Jerdonek]

FWIW, as an American I don't think it's appropriate to spell out the
n-word in a mailing list, even if it's not being directed at anybody
or even just being used as an example. There's no need, and it can
only cause discomfort or worse.

--Chris


On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Ethan Furman  wrote:
> On 09/20/2018 02:17 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> I will also say I didn't voice an opinion or participate in the discussion
>> on the conduct WG when deciding how to handle
>> it (beyond outlining our levels of escalation when handling these
>> situations).
>
>
> One thing missing from the ban notification is the length of time?  If this
> is the first offense it should only be two months, right?
>
> And I have to argue against his use of the n-word* as being part of the
> reason -- he wasn't calling anybody that, he was using the word as an
> example of a taboo in one culture that is not in others.  Using that as part
> of the reason to ban him helps me understand the sentiment voiced at the
> sprints of the feeling that the CoC is a weapon waiting to shoot us down.
>
> I fully appreciate the frustration of trying to moderate these lists with
> our limited tools, but we still need to be careful of the reasons we use for
> moderation actions.
>
> Does the CoC WG have an email address?  I'm happy to forward my concerns to
> them about their decision.
>
> --
> ~Ethan~
>
>
> * Before this I wouldn't have spelled out the n-word anyway, but now I'm
> afraid to.
>
> ___
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Ethan Furman]

On 09/20/2018 02:17 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:


I will also say I didn't voice an opinion or participate in the discussion on 
the conduct WG when deciding how to handle
it (beyond outlining our levels of escalation when handling these situations).


One thing missing from the ban notification is the length of time?  If this is the first offense it should only be two 
months, right?


And I have to argue against his use of the n-word* as being part of the reason -- he wasn't calling anybody that, he was 
using the word as an example of a taboo in one culture that is not in others.  Using that as part of the reason to ban 
him helps me understand the sentiment voiced at the sprints of the feeling that the CoC is a weapon waiting to shoot us 
down.


I fully appreciate the frustration of trying to moderate these lists with our limited tools, but we still need to be 
careful of the reasons we use for moderation actions.


Does the CoC WG have an email address?  I'm happy to forward my concerns to 
them about their decision.

--
~Ethan~


* Before this I wouldn't have spelled out the n-word anyway, but now I'm afraid 
to.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Brett Cannon]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 13:57 Donald Stufft  wrote:

>
>
> On Sep 20, 2018, at 4:25 PM, Antoine Pitrou  wrote:
>
> I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
> mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:
>
>
>
> Just FTR, the conduct working group is the PSFs CoC Working Group, which I
> believe had an open call for membership at some point. I think it’s still
> getting setup so it hasn’t been added to the list of WGs yet or anything,
> but it was approved awhile back:
> https://www.python.org/psf/records/board/minutes/2017-08-22/#code-of-conduct-work-group
>
> At least, I’m pretty sure that’s what Brett means.
>

Yep, that's exactly who I meant. Didn't realize the group had not been
added to the WG list online yet.


> With regards to the action, it seems reasonable to me, particularly since
> it was not a one-off done by one person, but was an action taken after
> discussion amongst the moderators and the CoC WG.
>

I will also say I didn't voice an opinion or participate in the discussion
on the conduct WG when deciding how to handle it (beyond outlining our
levels of escalation when handling these situations).

So to Yury's point of neutrality in another email, I stayed out of the
decision and basically just coordinated the handling of it.


>
> I do agree that our tools are bad, and we need to come up with new ones.
> With limited moderation tooling we have limited ability to head off
> unproductive discussions before they delve too far into the bad end of the
> world.
>

My hope is we will end up with something that allows us to centralize
managing things like CoC issues so there is a consistent neutral party to
manage all of this. It's something I'm actively talking to the conduct WG
about in hopes that they can support that somehow and help make it happen.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Yury Selivanov]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 4:37 PM Antoine Pitrou  wrote:
>
>
> Apparently it's this one:
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2018-September/053482.html

After reading the original email I, personally, am in support of the
WG & Brett's decision.

I also think that we need a neutral third-party to enforce CoC; it's
unfortunate that Brett is the one who has to be dragged though this.

>
> By the way, regardless of this single case, I would like people to think
> of the broader issue we're having.  It's more than a single contentious
> decision.

This is why we want to try Discourse for the upcoming governance
discussions.  We'll see if its tools to organize and moderate
discussions (and some would agree better UX) make a difference.

Yury

Yury
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Donald Stufft]

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 4:25 PM, Antoine Pitrou  wrote:
> 
> I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
> mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:


Just FTR, the conduct working group is the PSFs CoC Working Group, which I 
believe had an open call for membership at some point. I think it’s still 
getting setup so it hasn’t been added to the list of WGs yet or anything, but 
it was approved awhile back: 
https://www.python.org/psf/records/board/minutes/2017-08-22/#code-of-conduct-work-group
 


At least, I’m pretty sure that’s what Brett means.

With regards to the action, it seems reasonable to me, particularly since it 
was not a one-off done by one person, but was an action taken after discussion 
amongst the moderators and the CoC WG.

I do agree that our tools are bad, and we need to come up with new ones. With 
limited moderation tooling we have limited ability to head off unproductive 
discussions before they delve too far into the bad end of the world.

I think if there is concern about this, the best forum is probably discussion 
with the CoC WG, and probably not python-committers.


___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Antoine Pitrou]

Apparently it's this one:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2018-September/053482.html

By the way, regardless of this single case, I would like people to think
of the broader issue we're having.  It's more than a single contentious
decision.

Regards

Antoine.


Le 20/09/2018 à 22:33, Alex Gaynor a écrit :
> Is there a copy of the original email? (I'm not a regular python-ideas
> reader)
> 
> Based on Brett's description though, the content sounds very far over
> the line, and I wouldn't want to interfere with the WG's decision.
> 
> Alex
> 
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 4:25 PM Antoine Pitrou  > wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm choosing to forward this to python-committers because I don't think
> python-ideas is a reasonable place to discuss CoC decisions.
> 
> I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
> mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:
> 
> - a definitive ban is an extremely strong decision that should only be
> taken if nothing else works.  May I remind that Anatoly was able to post
> prolifically and unconstructively for several years, being warned
> several times, before being finally banned?  Comparatively, this one ban
> seems expeditive.
> 
> - the reasons given, to me, don't make sense at all.  The word "n-"
> is not a forbidden word if you want to describe, precisely, linguistics
> and the relativity of meanings (instead of actually *qualifying* someone
> or a groupe of people), which is what the OP claimed to do.  The other
> reasons look like a similar kind of over-reaction.  Even if something
> there looks inappropriate to you, it's still enough of a grey area that
> a ban is absolutely the wrong answer.
> 
> I deduce that it's ok to say "slave" in a discussion instead of using an
> expression such as "the s-word".  Why one term is allowed and the other,
> not, may be clear to Americans (or, perhaps, a large fraction thereof),
> but hey, it's not clear to other people around the world.  Banning a
> (apparently) Dutch person because he doesn't understand American
> standards of offense is not only unfair, but it makes our community
> *not* inclusive of other cultures.
> 
> As a French person myself, I could not, even if I wanted to, turn myself
> into an authentic American: what is obvious to you is not obvious to me
> and it would be extremely brutal and humiliating to ban me for having
> the wrong nationality and the wrong culture.  I will ask: please
> consider the work and effort that it *already* takes for other people to
> adapt to standards of discussion that are, obviously, those of a
> particular culture.  Otherwise you're raising barriers even more, not
> lowering them.
> 
> 
> At the end of it, it looks like we have a real moderation problem.
> python-ideas threads frequently veer out into unconstructive
> back-and-forths (and, well, that's not *only* the ethically-sensitive
> threads).  The CoC is being applied erratically, sometimes
> precipitately, by apparently overworked and emotionally exhausted
> moderators, with bad consequences on the quality of the decisions.
> 
> Moderators should not become emotionally exhausted (which means we need
> a more adequate discussion system *and* a more collegial, spread out,
> team of moderators); and, if they become so, I would humbly suggest it's
> a better idea - even if not always easy to follow - to step back and
> take some rest than make decisions in such a state.  We also need real
> guidelines to the moderators as to which decision on the scale of
> possible decisions to apply, depending on severity of the offense /
> violation and on the "offendor"'s past behaviour.
> 
> In the end, I hope we can set ourselves better moderation standards.  As
> for me, I find the current situation very worrying, including for my
> ability to contribute constructively to Python.  If I have to fear
> banning for every word that I say and that might be deemed inappropriate
> in the moderators' culture, I might just as well leave instead of
> feeling stressed and anguished everytime I post something.  I would not
> want to live this in paid work: why would I endure it as a volunteer,
> while my main gratification should be the pleasure taken in
> contributing?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Antoine.
> 
> 
> 
> - Message Transféré -
> 
> Date : Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:56:05 -0700
> De : Brett Cannon  >
> À : Jacco van Dorp
>  >
> Cc : python-ideas
>  >
> Groupe de discussion : gmane.comp.python.ideas
> Sujet : CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the 

Re: [python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Alex Gaynor]

Is there a copy of the original email? (I'm not a regular python-ideas
reader)

Based on Brett's description though, the content sounds very far over the
line, and I wouldn't want to interfere with the WG's decision.

Alex

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 4:25 PM Antoine Pitrou  wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm choosing to forward this to python-committers because I don't think
> python-ideas is a reasonable place to discuss CoC decisions.
>
> I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
> mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:
>
> - a definitive ban is an extremely strong decision that should only be
> taken if nothing else works.  May I remind that Anatoly was able to post
> prolifically and unconstructively for several years, being warned
> several times, before being finally banned?  Comparatively, this one ban
> seems expeditive.
>
> - the reasons given, to me, don't make sense at all.  The word "n-"
> is not a forbidden word if you want to describe, precisely, linguistics
> and the relativity of meanings (instead of actually *qualifying* someone
> or a groupe of people), which is what the OP claimed to do.  The other
> reasons look like a similar kind of over-reaction.  Even if something
> there looks inappropriate to you, it's still enough of a grey area that
> a ban is absolutely the wrong answer.
>
> I deduce that it's ok to say "slave" in a discussion instead of using an
> expression such as "the s-word".  Why one term is allowed and the other,
> not, may be clear to Americans (or, perhaps, a large fraction thereof),
> but hey, it's not clear to other people around the world.  Banning a
> (apparently) Dutch person because he doesn't understand American
> standards of offense is not only unfair, but it makes our community
> *not* inclusive of other cultures.
>
> As a French person myself, I could not, even if I wanted to, turn myself
> into an authentic American: what is obvious to you is not obvious to me
> and it would be extremely brutal and humiliating to ban me for having
> the wrong nationality and the wrong culture.  I will ask: please
> consider the work and effort that it *already* takes for other people to
> adapt to standards of discussion that are, obviously, those of a
> particular culture.  Otherwise you're raising barriers even more, not
> lowering them.
>
>
> At the end of it, it looks like we have a real moderation problem.
> python-ideas threads frequently veer out into unconstructive
> back-and-forths (and, well, that's not *only* the ethically-sensitive
> threads).  The CoC is being applied erratically, sometimes
> precipitately, by apparently overworked and emotionally exhausted
> moderators, with bad consequences on the quality of the decisions.
>
> Moderators should not become emotionally exhausted (which means we need
> a more adequate discussion system *and* a more collegial, spread out,
> team of moderators); and, if they become so, I would humbly suggest it's
> a better idea - even if not always easy to follow - to step back and
> take some rest than make decisions in such a state.  We also need real
> guidelines to the moderators as to which decision on the scale of
> possible decisions to apply, depending on severity of the offense /
> violation and on the "offendor"'s past behaviour.
>
> In the end, I hope we can set ourselves better moderation standards.  As
> for me, I find the current situation very worrying, including for my
> ability to contribute constructively to Python.  If I have to fear
> banning for every word that I say and that might be deemed inappropriate
> in the moderators' culture, I might just as well leave instead of
> feeling stressed and anguished everytime I post something.  I would not
> want to live this in paid work: why would I endure it as a volunteer,
> while my main gratification should be the pleasure taken in contributing?
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
>
> - Message Transféré -
>
> Date : Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:56:05 -0700
> De : Brett Cannon 
> À : Jacco van Dorp 
> Cc : python-ideas 
> Groupe de discussion : gmane.comp.python.ideas
> Sujet : CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better
> than ugly" Zen clause)
>
>
> The below email was reported to the PSF board for code of conduct
> violations and then passed on to the conduct working group to decide on
> an appropriate response.
>
> Based on the WG's recommendation and after discussing it with Titus, the
> decision has been made to ban Jacco from python-ideas. Trivializing
> assault, using the n-word, and making inappropriate comments about
> someone's mental stability are all uncalled for and entirely
> unnecessary to carry on a reasonable discourse of conversation that
> remains welcoming to others.
> ___
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> Code of Conduct: 

[python-committers] Fw: CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better than ugly" Zen clause)

[Antoine Pitrou]

Hi,

I'm choosing to forward this to python-committers because I don't think
python-ideas is a reasonable place to discuss CoC decisions.

I think the action taken by Brett (apparently decided with Titus and a
mysterious "conduct working group") is not the right one:

- a definitive ban is an extremely strong decision that should only be
taken if nothing else works.  May I remind that Anatoly was able to post
prolifically and unconstructively for several years, being warned
several times, before being finally banned?  Comparatively, this one ban
seems expeditive.

- the reasons given, to me, don't make sense at all.  The word "n-"
is not a forbidden word if you want to describe, precisely, linguistics
and the relativity of meanings (instead of actually *qualifying* someone
or a groupe of people), which is what the OP claimed to do.  The other
reasons look like a similar kind of over-reaction.  Even if something
there looks inappropriate to you, it's still enough of a grey area that
a ban is absolutely the wrong answer.

I deduce that it's ok to say "slave" in a discussion instead of using an
expression such as "the s-word".  Why one term is allowed and the other,
not, may be clear to Americans (or, perhaps, a large fraction thereof),
but hey, it's not clear to other people around the world.  Banning a
(apparently) Dutch person because he doesn't understand American
standards of offense is not only unfair, but it makes our community
*not* inclusive of other cultures.

As a French person myself, I could not, even if I wanted to, turn myself
into an authentic American: what is obvious to you is not obvious to me
and it would be extremely brutal and humiliating to ban me for having
the wrong nationality and the wrong culture.  I will ask: please
consider the work and effort that it *already* takes for other people to
adapt to standards of discussion that are, obviously, those of a
particular culture.  Otherwise you're raising barriers even more, not
lowering them.


At the end of it, it looks like we have a real moderation problem.
python-ideas threads frequently veer out into unconstructive
back-and-forths (and, well, that's not *only* the ethically-sensitive
threads).  The CoC is being applied erratically, sometimes
precipitately, by apparently overworked and emotionally exhausted
moderators, with bad consequences on the quality of the decisions.

Moderators should not become emotionally exhausted (which means we need
a more adequate discussion system *and* a more collegial, spread out,
team of moderators); and, if they become so, I would humbly suggest it's
a better idea - even if not always easy to follow - to step back and
take some rest than make decisions in such a state.  We also need real
guidelines to the moderators as to which decision on the scale of
possible decisions to apply, depending on severity of the offense /
violation and on the "offendor"'s past behaviour.

In the end, I hope we can set ourselves better moderation standards.  As
for me, I find the current situation very worrying, including for my
ability to contribute constructively to Python.  If I have to fear
banning for every word that I say and that might be deemed inappropriate
in the moderators' culture, I might just as well leave instead of
feeling stressed and anguished everytime I post something.  I would not
want to live this in paid work: why would I endure it as a volunteer,
while my main gratification should be the pleasure taken in contributing?

Regards

Antoine.



- Message Transféré -

Date : Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:56:05 -0700
De : Brett Cannon 
À : Jacco van Dorp 
Cc : python-ideas 
Groupe de discussion : gmane.comp.python.ideas
Sujet : CoC violation (was: Retire or reword the "Beautiful is better
than ugly" Zen clause)


The below email was reported to the PSF board for code of conduct
violations and then passed on to the conduct working group to decide on
an appropriate response.

Based on the WG's recommendation and after discussing it with Titus, the
decision has been made to ban Jacco from python-ideas. Trivializing
assault, using the n-word, and making inappropriate comments about
someone's mental stability are all uncalled for and entirely
unnecessary to carry on a reasonable discourse of conversation that
remains welcoming to others.
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/