[coreboot] coreboot code of conduct
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Mon Jan 19 12:52:37 CET 2015
On 19.01.2015 01:49, Marc Jones wrote:
> On Sat Jan 17 2015 at 8:12:20 PM Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>> thanks for writing this up.
>> On 16.01.2015 19:15, Marc Jones wrote:
>>> A coreboot code of conduct has been posted on the wiki.
>>> - http://www.coreboot.org/Code_of_Conduct
>>> I have written a blog post about why we have a code of conduct.
>>> - http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/01/16/coreboot-code-of-conduct/
>>> Feel free to give feedback on the policy and how else we can contribute
>>> to a welcoming and collaborative environment.
>> Given that the Code of Conduct has been announced publicly in a blog
>> post, the feedback is probably expected to be public as well. Apologies
>> if that is not the case.
>> The current wording suggests that anyone can be expelled from the
>> community permanently without warning for either perceived harrassment
>> or for strongly enforcing the code of conduct. This is probably not the
> Open discussion is acceptable.
Adding that sentence to the CoC would be helpful.
>> Furthermore, the second paragraph of "Unacceptable Behaviour" is either
>> redundant or woefully incomplete. If you really think the word
>> "harassing" from the first paragraph needs to be defined, you should
>> define the other words from the first paragraph "intimidating",
>> "abusive", "discriminatory", "derogatory" and "demeaning" as well. I
>> suggest deleting that second paragraph.
> I'll disagree. Harassment is the most common problem in online communities
Real citation needed, not just some sentiment. For example, quite a few
feminist blogs point to intimidating and derogatory speech/actions as
the primary hurdles against female participation in online communities.
> and warrants the paragraph about those unacceptable behaviors.
If harassment is the most common problem, that definitely warrants
listing harassment first (which is not the case in the current CoC).
> every other term would not make this policy any more robust.
Is the term "harassment" so unclear it warrants explanation? I thought
there was universal agreement that harassment is bad, but having to
define harassment implies that there is no such universal agreement (you
can't agree on something undefined).
I argue that creating our own homegrown definition of harassment (or
copying someone else's homegrown definition) makes this policy less
robust because this current homegrown definition is woefully incomplete.
>> Please define "community organizers". Did you mean "arbitration team"?
>> Or is it the community members present at an event?
> It isn't not meant to be specific to an arbitration team. These members may
> not be present in all cases and organizers of events and online communities
> should uphold the good standards of the community.
Thanks for clarifying. The CoC would benefit from adding this clarification.
>> How can we deploy this against people not part of our community? If
>> they're not part of the community in the first place, it is by
>> definition impossible to exclude them from our community and the Code of
>> Conduct in its current form does not apply. If, on the other hand, we
>> define everyone on the mailing list, everyone on IRC and everyone
>> visiting our booths at various conferences and trade shows as being part
>> of our community, we're going to overshoot the mark. I don't want to be
>> guilty by association just because some troll on IRC joins all channels,
>> spews some random offensive crap and disappears.
> It applies to everyone that participates in coreboot communication, online,
> at an event or in a conference booth. People that are not up to this
> standard of behavior are not welcome in our community and they should be
> asked to leave. If a troll joins and spams the channel, clearly ask them to
> leave. If they don't leave report them to a channel or IRCOP. If there is a
> question of the policy or of a behavior, please contact an organizer or
> someone from the arbitration team.
Great, thanks for the explanation and guideline!
More information about the coreboot