Re: xdg Digest, Vol 157, Issue 3

Daniel Stone <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.xdg.devel
Message-ID <CAPj87rOeyHRx1SgWwC6NW3_OCAKjGorWxeHe7pi8p2TT03V+Nw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Philipp,

On 11 April 2017 at 12:40, Philipp A. <[email protected]> wrote:
> Daniel Stone <[email protected]> schrieb am Di., 11. Apr. 2017 um 13:26
> Uhr:
>> Constructive feedback on the specific form and wording of the CoC is
>> more than welcome. What would be even better is if you're able to
>> point to the experiences of other communities, the discussions they've
>> had, and where they landed. The exact wording isn't irreversibly set
>> in stone, and I'm sure we'll want to be tweaking it over time. What is
>> set in stone is that we (the fd.o admins, who unanimously approved
>> this change) are committed to this CoC, and will not be turning back
>> from it.
>
> This is great news, as this way, the identified problems with its wording
> can be actually used to improve upon it. I was probably too much in the
> “software license” mindset, where a layman can’t dare to change the wording
> without fucking up. But actual feedback to improve this, based on other
> communities’ experiences? Sign me up.
>
> For one, I’d like to point to the Rust community, which also uses a CoC that
> begins similarly to, but is less problematic than the CC:
> https://www.rust-lang.org/en-US/conduct.html
>
> Regarding constructive criticism: The CC’s “Enforcement” paragraph is highly
> problematic. Its intent is clearly to foster accountability and prevent
> harrassers going unscathed due to being buddies with a mod. But it only
> protects the reporter, while nothing protects the (maybe wrongly) accused. I
> want to see a more “innocent until proven guilty” mindset reflected in a
> CoC. Accusing people shouldn’t be a powerful tool for harrassers, and witch
> hunts should be discouraged.

Is the enforcement section your primary problem with the CC, and how
specifically (in terms of actual language used - or not used) do you
see Rust's CoC as improving on this? Is it the piece where it insists
on the CC being both followed and enforced? If so, I personally read
that to mean that reports cannot be ignored, and problematic behaviour
cannot be waved away. I _don't_ read it as an assumption that every
report must result in action being taken against the accused, no
matter what. If we provided a tool which allowed anyone to kick anyone
else out of a community just by presenting a few magic keywords, we
would have utterly failed; I don't think the CC as written has done
that.

Thanks a lot!

Cheers,
Daniel
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.