Re: Code of Conduct plan

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 8:42 PM, James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com> wrote:

> I accidentally didn't send this to the whole list. I'll let Chris resend
> his response if he'd like.
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:58 PM, James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I think the fundamental outcome is likely to be that people who cause
>>> trouble are likely to get trouble. This sort of case really doesn't worry
>>> me. I am sure whoever is stirring the pot will be asked at least to cease
>>> doing so.
>>>
>>>
>> Are you implying that either of my RPCs are causing "trouble" for either
>> advancing a technical proposal, not wanting to change wording they feel is
>> clear and non-political, or for voicing their concerns that a proposal is
>> highly offensive?
>>
>
There's an old Icelandic mythic poem "Lokasenna" which describes what I
have seen happening very well. If you come to the feast to pick fights,
fights is what one will get.

>
>> The whole point of the CoC is that people shouldn't feel like they're
>> causing "trouble" if they feel like they're being picked on or offended or
>> marginalized. That's specifically why people want them: they want to know,
>> or at least feel like, they'll be taken seriously if someone is
>> legitimately picking on them or marginalizing them.
>>
>> I complain a lot about the CoC, but I agree with Tom (I think it was) in
>> saying that there does need to be some written framework for how disputes
>> are handled by the organization. I just feel that CoC has, unfortunately,
>> become a politically charged term that often find themselves talking about
>> politically charged subjects instead of saying you should focus on
>> technical topics and not on the person when discussing a technical topic
>> and how a dispute will be handled if someone is misbehaving. I've seen them
>> used as weapons in real life and have watch disputes play out over the
>> internet, e.g. the famous push for opal to adop the Contributor Covenent by
>> someone not affiliated with the project and who (potentially/allegedly)
>> misunderstood a partial conversation they heard. (
>> https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941).
>>
>> The question is: how can you (honestly) make people feel like we'll take
>> complaints seriously, while also not allowing for the politics that I've
>> seen surround recent incarnations of Codes of Conduct?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>
>
At the end I see signals in the current CoC that make me hopeful. Phrases
like "common interest" occur. There are some minor changes I think would
help avoid problems. But they aren't big deals. The big thing is I trust
our community not to exclude people based, for example, on political or
cultural perspectives and thats really important.

--
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

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