Re: Code of Conduct plan

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:45 AM Ilya Kosmodemiansky <ik(at)dataegret(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > I really have to object to this addition:
> > "This Code is meant to cover all interaction between community members,
> > whether or not it takes place within postgresql.org infrastructure, so
> long
> > as there is not another Code of Conduct that takes precedence (such as a
> > conference's Code of Conduct)."
> >
> > That covers things like public twitter messages over live political
> > controversies which might not be personally directed. At least if one
> is
> > going to go that route, one ought to *also* include a safe harbor for
> > non-personally-directed discussions of philosophy, social issues, and
> > politics. Otherwise, I think this is asking for trouble. See, for
> example,
> > what happened with Opalgate and how this could be seen to encourage use
> of
> > this to silence political controversies unrelated to PostgreSQL.
>
> I think, this point has nothing to do with _correct_ discussions or
> public tweets.
>
> If one community member tweets publicly and in a way which abuses
> other community members, it is obvious CoC violation. It is hard to
> imagine healthy community if someone interacts with others correctly
> on the list or at a conference because the CoC stops him doing things
> which he will do on private capacity to the same people when CoC
> doesnt apply.
>
> If someone reports CoC violation just because other community member's
> _correct_ public tweet or whatsoever expressed different
> political/philosophical/religious views, this is a quite different
> story. I suppose CoC committee and/or Core team in this case should
> explain the reporter the purpose of CoC rather than automatically
> enforce it.
>

So first, I think what the clause is trying to do is address cases where
harassment targeting a particular community member takes place outside the
infrastructure and frankly ensuring that the code of conduct applies in
these cases is important and something I agree with.

However, let's look at problem cases:

"I am enough of a Marxist to see gender as a qualitative relationship to
biological reproduction and maybe economic production too."

I can totally imagine someone arguing that such a tweet might be abusive,
and certainly not "correct."

Or consider:

"The effort to push GLBT rights on family-business economies is nothing
more than an effort at corporate neocolonialism."

Which would make the problem more clear. Whether or not a comment like
that occurring outside postgresql.org infrastructure would be considered
"correct" or "abusive" is ultimately a political decision and something
which, once that fight is picked, has no reasonable solution in an
international and cross-cultural product (where issues like sexuality,
economics, and how gender and individualism intersect will vary
dramatically across members around the world). There are people who will
assume that both of the above statements are personally offensive and
attacks on the basis of gender identity even if they are critiques of
political agendas severable from that. Worse, the sense of attack
themselves could be seen as attacks on culture or religions of other
participants.

Now neither of these comments would be tolerated as viewpoints expressed on
PostgreSQL.org email lists because they are off-topic, but once one expands
the code of conduct in this way they become fair game. Given the way
culture war issues are shaping up particularly in the US, I think one has
to be very careful not to set an expectation that this applies to literally
everything that anyone does anywhere.

So maybe something more like:

"Conduct that occurs outside the postgresql.org infrastructure is not
automatically excluded from enforcement of this code of conduct. In
particular if other parties are unable to act, and if it is, on balance, in
the interest of the global community to apply the code of conduct, then the
code of conduct shall apply."

>
> > --
> > Best Wishes,
> > Chris Travers
> >
> > Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor
> > lock-in.
> > http://www.efficito.com/learn_more
>

--
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor
lock-in.
http://www.efficito.com/learn_more