[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NEWS for 0.10.0
From: |
Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer |
Subject: |
Re: NEWS for 0.10.0 |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Mar 2016 22:17:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 01:02:15PM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
>
> There is nothing in the current coc which I particularly disagree with -
> all the examples of unacceptable conduct I personally consider unacceptable
> in all walks of life.
>
> Unfortunately, ???be excellent to each other??? is not a CoC, and it's
> often an excuse not to have one.
>
> I can think of two much better "excuses" :
>
>
> The first is:
>
> What hurts me when somebody shoves a "code-of-conduct" in my face, is the
> veiled
> suggestion that lies behind it. Viz: "You might be a person who habitually
> uses
> sexually explicit language, insults people, harrasses others, assaults
> people,
> ... murders them ..."
The COC is there for everyone; I don't see why anybody should take it
personally and feel accused of anything.
> Of course, on a literal level this suggestion is correct, for a person who
> has never
> met me, for all they know I might be a person who does those things. But why
> accuse a person of those things on the first introduction?
>
> The second is:
>
> By having an explicit coc, the explicit message is "Examples of unacceptable
> behavior by participants include ..." The implicit message which is a logical
> consequence is: "... and we anticipate or have already experienced such
> behaviour by participants."
Sure. We're on the Internet. :-)
> When I invite someone to my home for coffee, I do have a "code of conduct" I
> expect my guests to be resonably polite, not to insult me, not to vandalise
> my
> home, fart in my face and lots of other things. But I this "code of conduct"
> is
> implicit. I don't write it down. I don't ask my guests to agree to it
> before
> they enter my home - if I did I would not be suprised if the very suggestion
> would cause them to be extremely offended. I would not blame them if they
> excused themselves and departed without delay. Likewise I think these "codes
> of
> conduct" in community projects do not have the effect of welcoming people.
> They
> have the opposite effect.
There's the point that things are different on the Internet, and then
there's a point to be made about one-to-one or small-group meetings
where bad behavior will stick out immediately vs. large conventions
where bad behavior might remain undetected. Having a COC gives a
guarantee to participants that if they personally have a bad experience,
they can bring it up to the organizers and action *will* be taken. The
same principle applies to a large online community.
> So lets HAVE a code of conduct. But let's not have a written one. Let's be
> open
> and inviting. If somebody does come in and start
> harassing/insulting/sexually
> assaulting/ people (which I think unlikely) we'll uninvite them.
>
> J'
Taylan
Re: NEWS for 0.10.0, Leo Famulari, 2016/03/27