I am in general very pro code-of-conduct. Still, this call to build something better has interesting thoughts in it https://shiromarieke.github.io/coc.html
But I'm not sure what something better would be yet, so ATM I think having a CoC is best
@cwebber The CoC's sort of "model" doesn't really address existing community issues effectively. All it can do is be a prophylatic measure against such issues from taking hold, if they haven't already.
But if it already has, the CoC is as good as dead from day zero. I don't believe any CoC can fix that.
The CoC is like a vaccine, not an antibiotic.
@Elizafox IME a CoC has been a document we can point to when someone is behaving in a way we consider unacceptable in our community... "change your behavior or leave".
A lot of recent calls have been made to make CoCs explicit in what is/isn't allowed and define enforcement paths. But it's hard to know what you'll run up against in advance and I have had "well the CoC didn't explicitly say this was bad so I'm fine!" experiences (no, it's still not ok). I'm not sure preciseness is best.
@Elizafox This is in contrast to a copyright license which must be legally precise, because it's enforced in court. CoCs are generally community normative documents.
@cwebber Overly precise documents are not the answer.
Anyone who is looking for loopholes to abuse others doesn't belong in the organisation. I'm not sure what language best covers this, but it should never be tolerated.
@cwebber There is also a danger in playing fast and loose with a CoC that becomes so vague even minor accidents can become grounds to throw someone out. On the other hand, abuse of CoC's does sometimes happen (but before the CoC, people were just unjustly thrown out under bogus pretenses anyway; it's just a new form of cover).
@cwebber That post has some wonky logic. E.g., a requirement interpreted as virtue signaling ("checklist" section) instead of genuine intent but failed implementation. A solution there is to work to fix the implementation. But if you see the requirement as disingenuous then where does that leave you?
Likewise with the "Don't Hit On The Students" section. If you see the intent as removing a freedom rather than making a bright-line for the unaware or malicious, then how do you progress?
@jond I don't agree with all of the post. Maybe giving many clear examples of what is not allowed is important. As I said, I'm not sure what's better, hence why I continue to make use of broad CoCs in my projects.
It could be that broad CoCs with specific examples are the best answer? I'm not sure.
@cwebber Broad CoC that's very clear (e.g., has examples) with leeway for interpretation.
My experience is that hard rules are brittle and will be rules-lawyered by people seeking to take advantage of the system. Requirements to have X witnesses, etc.
In the end, the basic question always comes down to: do you trust the people organizing the event / moderating the space / etc. If so, a good CoC with good process and good feedback loop goes far. If not, they're often just a cover.
@jond I think that matches my current feelings on things.
As a note, my main hesitancy to post about anything considering on *iterating on* a code of conduct type design can be a dogwhistle for "CoCs are bad let's get rid of them"
I think CoCs have been a useful development. I do wonder if we can improve the design. I just don't know what that may be.
@cwebber I agree. I think that, similarly to how widespread use and discussion of FL/OSS licenses made coders consider the legal and social dimensions of code re/use, CoCs may also help force techies to consider their personal actions and inactions WRT inclusiveness. That is, at minimum if someone has a CoC, you know they at least thought about it, once. That's more than some ever did! :)
@cathal @cwebber I also agree.
I think comparing with licenses is a good approach.
Incidentally, I remember a time not too long ago when many developers were angry and annoyed about having to choose or respect licenses at all... which led things like the WTFPL.
I am not convinced this time has passed... ๐
@HerraBRE @cathal More has been written on this before, especially by @brainwane http://crookedtimber.org/2015/04/10/codes-of-conduct-and-the-trade-offs-of-copyleft/
I once wrote about it too https://dustycloud.org/blog/code-of-copylefts/ but embarrassingly forgot that most of the ideas came from an in-person conversation with Sumana about her post. Oops..
At any rate it's good that this has been a thread about "how can we do these things better?" rather than "rawr down with CoCs"! In retrospect I really risked the latter especially with the post I started this thread with.
@meff @cathal @cwebber Yes, they absolutely do.
But both also strive to define aspects of the community around a project, and both can be quite divisive because people have Opinions(tm), and both licenses and CoCs benefit from consideration and gradual improvements.
So there are many meta-things in common.
I think CoCs have been a good tool for moderators as how they should conduct their work rightfully and not be too arbitrary... but... Like for EULAs.. users doesn't really read them.
The best CoCs are short and simple.. the issues comes when they try to overreach or are unclear.
Since I brought it up on a followers-only part of the thread, I think I ought to also point to this comment on lobste.rs that I think matches a lot of my thinking https://lobste.rs/s/nulfct/problem_with_code_conduct#c_b51goy
@cwebber I think it's a very valuable project to iterate on codes of conduct, describe the important details of implementation and propose other community safety processes.
Nonetheless, it's hard to read this post as any of that; the author says that a Code of Conduct document alone won't solve all problems (true!), therefore, CoCs are preventing an unspecified better alternative (citation-needed!).
Well, overall I think the conversation on this thread was quite good, and made me feel that maybe the post I linked to actually maybe wasn't. :)
@cwebber the discourse about codes of conduct in the oss spaces feels SO far behind the rest of the world in moderation. like, have none of these people ever been on an internet forum?
it's like trying to debate tort law and then walking into a room where a bunch of people are saying "maybe killing people .... is bad, actually".
anyway i don't agree with everything in this article https://eev.ee/blog/2016/07/22/on-a-technicality/ but it's a good starting point for where i'm at when i'm thinking about community spaces nowadays
@cwebber Most of the objections to CoCs in that post seem so... shallow & superficial? Like "We had a thing about blind people, but didn't have software support", that doesn't mean you should throw out all CoCs! Just because you're not skilled to deal with it, doesn't mean you should throw out all CoC. etc....
@ebel Yes, I think the rest of this thread covered that and generally achieved consensus on that
I also think https://lobste.rs/s/nulfct/problem_with_code_conduct#c_b51goy put it well
@cwebber My personal experience with various projects is that often the CoC is generally unevenly applied and certain people seem almost exempt from the rules. A big thing is that trans people are often thrown under the bus when a TERF comes around.
The CoC ultimately is only as good as the community's will to enforce it. I think it's up to people to consider forking a project if they believe strongly the project is not upholding the values they claim to.