Code of Conduct.

[mikeal]

Governance and contribution policy are now in #13

Code of Conduct is now in #14

I was about to comment on the new threads about core governance when I realized that all of them presume some knowledge of the structure we've adopted and have been using for some time in Node Forward.

Without discussing and being able to link to some kind of ongoing documentation I don't think the conversation threads will be very fruitful so I've gone ahead and written them up in this pull request.

They are adapted from Node Forward's fork where they are sections in the CONTRIBUTING file. Here I've put them in to their own files for clearer separation. All direct references to Node Forward have been removed so that this can be adopted by any project without confusion.

The premise is simple: the project employs a simple governance structure that can be the "final word" on contentious issues and, most importantly, owns the contribution policy. The contribution policy is intended to be somewhat fluid and adapt over time to the needs of the project. The current one is geared heavily towards growing the contributor base of the project because that's the biggest problem. You can imagine that after the project grows a large cohort of contributors this policy would change to adapt the challenges of distributing work among a larger contributor base.

This separation between contributor and TC member is a necessary one. Liberalizing the contribution policy has been an effective tool at growing new contributors in Node Forward and in other projects that have been employing similar policies for some time. Of course, contributors who spend a fair amount of time in the project and want to take on additional responsibilities will find themselves on the TC but the direct correlation of commit rights to being part of a sometimes boring and bureaucratic process of managing the project at a higher level is an unnecessary barrier to growing contributors.

[mikeal]

FYI, I am working on a new PR. This one will only contain the CoC.

[brianloveswords]

Thank you @isaacs and @mikeal for this. I believe a CoC is a good thing and necessary.

@malandrew do you not see a problem with calling a handful of twitter replies a “lynch mob” given that we are talking about being inclusive to traditionally underrepresented groups?

[andrewdeandrade]

Moving towards a world where that space is less male dominated necessarily requires that we lose something.

The only thing I'm lamenting is the loss of due process and presumption of innocence until proven guilty. I refuse to lose either. That's the effect I'm protesting. Nothing more. Nothing less. Make that promise and I'm done here and we can move on. Seriously, it's that simple.

[andrewdeandrade]

@malandrew do you not see a problem with calling a handful of twitter replies a “lynch mob” given that we are literally talking about being inclusive to traditionally underrepresented groups?

That's how every one of these huge conflicts start. That the tweets in question in this didn't go anywhere is besides the point. It's tweets like that that get retweeted, amplifying conflict, leading to drama of epic proportions. Next thing you know someone who might otherwise not be such a bad guy is being excoriated everywhere. There is no retweet button on Github issues and pull requests. Going to an amplifying medium without first seeking remediation through the proper channels matters.

These are community issues and they should stay in the community until such time that there is a public statement to be made on an issue after due process.

And yes, that was a lynch mob. The fact that the topic at hand is about inclusiveness does make it any less so. There was namecalling, including namecalling by a community leader. That fact that it fizzled out doesn't mean it couldn't have snowballed into a massive lynch mob. There was no link to the original context. None. People on twitter were judging @gramergrater on one comment out of context. That's how all these things blow up. I have not seen the comments by gramergrater that have been deleted, but those that remain are perfectly rational and well argued. Insofar as the deleted ones are concerned. I have two people (@mikeal and @bnoordhuis) stating that the deleted comments were unacceptable and perfectly acceptable, respectively. I don't know about you, but the fact that two people have different opinions about the content leads me to believe that there may have been far more nuance in gramergraters deleted comments that was lost on the moderators.

[polotek]

I'd like to put in a vote of support for adopting a Code of Conduct. I've been a part of the node community from almost the beginning, and I've always appreciated that it wasn't like a lot of other toxic environments I've experienced. I'd like for more people who look like me to see a public statement of welcoming and inclusivity.

I agree with lots of other folks that a good CoC addresses how to take action when harassment is occurring or suspected of occurring. When it comes down to it, it's the leaders of any community that set the tone for how these things go. People need to be able to trust that the leaders will make themselves available and respond when there are issues. I think node folks are already doing a great job at that. It'll be great to have those leaders published and visible.

I know there are always going to be people who want to argue the merits and effectiveness of something like this. I'm not interested in debating the details. As long as a good CoC goes into place with provisions for enforcement, I'll feel good about it. I hope that the leaders on the Advisory Board and the Technical Committee are committed to making this happen and doing their part to ensure that node can attract and welcome people from all walks of life.

[jennschiffer]

@malandrew The tweets not going anywhere is not besides the point. I posted a screenshot of the entire comment, suggesting people follow this discussion. I did not change any words, I just posted what is here and in public.

In terms of public handling of conflict, nothing is "that simple." It is just as important to not silence victims as you think it is to not allow "public shaming." Letting one's audience know something that happened in a public sphere (here in Github issues) is not starting a lynch mob. Also, "lynch mob" in this context and most others is offensive and an extreme phrase to use for the sake of argument.

+1 to a Code of Conduct and to the recognizing that there exist marginalized groups in our community.

[andrewdeandrade]

Again: promise me that we will adhere to presumption of innocence until proven guilty and that guilt will be determined by due process and I'm done here.

This includes an expectation that people will abstain from tweeting about conflicts until culpability has been determined. The deliberations of a jury of peers becomes moot if the court of public opinion has already issued its ruling.

[andrewdeandrade]

I posted a screenshot of the entire comment, suggesting people follow this discussion. I did not change any words, I just posted what is here and in public.

That's a convenient representation of what you did. You do know that a simple link to the discussion would have sufficed, right? Priming the discussion by showing one comment out of place without the proceeding comments and calling the person of "creature" is exactly the sort of behavior that should not be tolerated. Using words like "creature" and "crazies" to refer to a participant in this discussion in an out-of-band channel that is prone to amplification is a lynch mob in my book. You should be apologizing. I was offended. gramergrater might have been as well.

That is exactly the kind of behavior that makes me feel unsafe.

[ghost]

@malandrew

I was the fat kid until I was ~16 or so. In elementary school, I was made fun and cried on the bus on many many occasions. My copying mechanism was self-deprecation by becoming the class clown. I think I can speak from experience on what marginalization feels like.

That is not marginalization. That is not an institutionalized, pervasive belief held by the majority of society that causes you to be oppressed.

[andrewdeandrade]

That is not marginalization. That is not an institutionalized, pervasive belief held by the majority of society that causes you to be oppressed.

If I were still fat, I would still be marginalized over my body weight. Last I check society still marginalizes the overweight in an institutionalized and pervasive way. I can't believe you would suggest otherwise.

[jennschiffer]

That's a convenient representation of what you did.

That is not a convenient representation - it is literally what I did. The point of my tweet was to show people the type of argument against CoC that were being made, specifically that commenter wondering whether there is even an overlap of marginalized people and node contributors. It is obviously what brought you to this discussion, so even if it were an attempt at "priming," your ability to read and make up your own mind overpowered that. Let's give my followers a bit more credit with regards to their ability to make their own opinions - even if they are different from yours.

I will not +1 any gag orders or non-disclosure agreements. This is a community, not the criminal justice system.

[brianloveswords]

@malandrew I personally don't know of any examples of overweight people being excluded from open source participation. I have countless examples of blacks, hispanics, women feeling excluded, both implicitly by the culture and explicitly by people's actions.

[andrewdeandrade]

"If you're not following the node advisory board discussions, you're missing out on this gem of a creature"

I believe those were your exact words, were they not?

[jennschiffer]

@malandrew Yes, here is link to the tweet too https://twitter.com/jennschiffer/status/533379777097637889

[andrewdeandrade]

I personally don't know of any examples of overweight people being excluded from open source participation. I have countless examples of blacks, hispanics, women feeling excluded, both implicitly by the culture and explicitly by people's actions.

Okay, so marginalizing fat people is perfectly okay to tolerate elsewhere just so long as we're not marginalizing them in open source.

[brianloveswords]

@malandrew No, but we are talking about open source in a thread about creating a code of conduct to make marginalized people feel safe. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain context, here.

[andrewdeandrade]

Yes, that's the tweet. Yes, I found it offensive. No, it was not cool. That's exactly the type of behavior that makes me feel unsafe.

[polotek]

@malandrew you're spilling a lot of ink on this. I think you've made yourself very clear. Please consider giving this particular issue a rest until the advisory board can review.

[andrewdeandrade]

No, but we are talking about open source in a thread about creating a code of conduct to make marginalized people feel safe. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain context, here.

If you read the comment that @trynity was responding to, you'll see that I was talking about what marginalization in society feels like in society in general and that someone does not need to be female or a minority to know what pervasive, institutionalized marginalization feels like.

[andrewdeandrade]

@malandrew you're spilling a lot of ink on this. I think you've made yourself very clear. Please consider giving this particular issue a rest until the advisory board can review.

Yes, because I have made it very clear what I need to feel safe. I know community leaders are reading this, yet only @polotek has acknowledged what I've asked for in order to feel safe. I see absolutely nothing objectionable in what I've have asked for.

[ghost]

@malandrew

If you read the comment that @trynity was responding to, you'll see that I was talking about what marginalization in society feels like in society in general and that someone does not need to be female > or a minority to know what pervasive, institutionalized marginalization feels like.

In your previous comment:

If I were still fat, it would be. Last I check society still marginalizes the overweight.

This is not the same thing.

Is fat shaming real? Yes.

Is is the same as being a part of a marginalized, oppressed group? No.

[andrewdeandrade]

Furthermore, I would feel better if someone would at least acknowledge my point about how how the choice of diction that gramergrater objected to is essentially the same issue as the use of genderless pronouns

[andrewdeandrade]

@trynity Sorry, you are wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sizeism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightism http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=discrimination+overweight&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=

[ghost]

@malandrew I'll just be over here being a woman, then.

[dunn]

@malandrew

Again: promise me that we will adhere to presumption of innocence until proven guilty and that guilt will be determined by due process and I'm done here.

If what's required for you to feel safe is the placement of an unreasonably high burden of proof on victims of assault and harassment (in other words making them feel un​safe), then you shouldn't be surprised that you're meeting resistance.

[CodeFoodPixels]

@malandrew I am overweight and have never felt marginalised by the open source community. Stop trying to make an issue out of something that isn't an issue. There are many cases of people being marginalised based on gender, race and sexuality.

[ghost]

@malandrew @grumble

If what's required for you to feel safe is the placement of an unreasonably high burden of proof on victims of assault and harassment (in other words making them feel un​safe), then you shouldn't be surprised that you're meeting resistance.

Exactly.

[ashedryden]

This has quickly devolved into the kind of discussion a lot of marginalized people, myself included, are not going to want to be in.

I appreciate that the community wants to discuss these things out in the open and give everyone a chance to speak their mind on the issue, but I worry that there's a lot of rules lawyering and posturing happening that is not only not productive, but stressing out marginalized people who are watching this or are included on this issue.

Perhaps it's best to step back and figure out:

• What the goals of this discussion are
• What things are not up for debate

[othiym23]

See #14. It includes only the Code of Conduct, is substantially expanded in the interests of clarity and completeness, and incorporates feedback from this thread. If @mikeal wants to pull my changes into this thread (or replace this PR with mine), to keep this the focused discussion of the Code of Conduct, I am happy to close my PR in favor of this one.

[brianloveswords]

@othiym23 I'm more in favor of shutting down this thread and starting a new one over there (if a new thread is even necessary).

[brianloveswords]

(sorry for double reply)

I think restarting a focused discussion in #14 will help clear the slate and let us do what @ashedryden brought up, have clear goals about the discussion and outline what's not up for debate.

[othiym23]

While I'm here: I find the characterization of Adria Richards as a "bully" offensive. She has worked hard and long, in the face of considerable, sustained harassment, to confront and resolve issues important to women in OSS. I have never seen her act in bad faith, nor have I seen evidence that persuades me that she has acted in bad faith. If you are going to point to bullying against men in OSS communities, please at least link to specific claims.

[andrewdeandrade]

@othiym23 http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/

[othiym23]

@ashedryden I agree, and I also would love your feedback on the changes I have made in #14.

[ashedryden]

@malandrew please stop

[mikeal]

@malandrew

I can identify two things are you asking for in order to feel safe:

• A commitment or "promise" that there won't be public outrage and consequences for the accused perpetrators of harassment on social media without some form of "due process"
• That the intent of actions found to be offensive be established in order for any "due process" to occur.

The problem with your first request is that it's simply impossible to commit to. No individual here possesses this kind of control. Conversely, you cannot promise that a 14-year on pick-your-number-chan won't find this thread and dox all the women who have participated.

The only thing we can do is create a process for reporting offenses that makes those most likely to experience harassment feel safe enough to report them and provide confidence that corrective action will be taken. That would have the effect of less people asking for corrective measures from the public. Creating a burdensome process or having no process at all will surely increase the number of people seeking justice elsewhere.

Your second request implicitly places a very high burden of proof on those effected by offensive actions. We already know that this would greatly decrease the number of reported offenses and decrease the participation of marginalized people in open source. The price of this is simply too high and it negatively impacts people who are already marginalized. If you have a constructive alternative that does not continue to marginalize these underrepresented groups then you should present it. If instead you continue to preach about the injustice imposed on the privileged then you're effectively supporting the continuation of an existing hegemony and imbalances of power and privilege.

[blakmatrix]

I find it very inspiring to see everyone's passionate responses to this thread, as Daniel Shaw has pointed out It has been a rich discussion indeed.

Part of what makes the node community so great is that it embodies the values and sentiments of many of those using and contributing to it.

We all share in the human experience, but we don't share every human experience. The difficulty of endeavors such as these is that we want to embody the core of the community we have and will want, as well as what we individually want, however, logistically it's near impossible to mutually inclusive of every community member to put into a consice document.

Civilizations and communities are rarely built overnight. No one knows everything the other knows and has experienced, but we can strive to get there through effective communication.

This is a very difficult task, not only are the leaders of our community trying to adress issues that for a while have been pain points, but they are also trying to create us a community we will be proud and passionate about for years to come.

Communicating is good, speaking ones mind is great, but offering solutions and working to progress is the best for building a community everyone will want to be a part of--more than ever we need to be showing eachother our best.

We need to work together, communicate effectively, and move forward by offeing solutions if we are to manage and be proud of a community for years to come.

Farrin A. Reid http://www.linkedin.com/in/farrinreid

[mikeal]

@othiym23 I'll close this thread and point at your new PR. There's actual documentation there to be considered which will hopefully have the effect of clearing out some of the less constructive threads here.

[aredridel]

:+1:

[jasonrhodes]

This seems like a natural place to close+lock this thread before anyone else can accidentally or otherwise light another match.

Also: as this discussion unfolds in other threads, I'm really interested in what @ashedryden mentioned about listing out the things that are non-negotiable here, which sounds incredibly helpful. I just don't know how that assertion works, not sure if people have suggestions there?

[brianloveswords]

@mikeal :clap: :clap:, might make sense to also lock it to contributors only so it doesn't keep spiraling out of control?

[andrewdeandrade]

https://twitter.com/_danilo/status/533744712533151744 https://twitter.com/ashedryden/status/533747995901460480 I'm not going to even bother linking to a single tweet on these: https://twitter.com/izs https://twitter.com/rockbot

Seriously @isaacs ? Like @bnoordhuis said of @mikeal's tweets:

Your Twitter comment is not becoming of someone who is involved with the TC.

We were having a discussion here on github in a pull request and people had to go lower the level of discourse by broadcasting all this stuff to the world on twitter. Now I'm officially an asshole everywhere on twitter right now because I had a contrarian view. Thanks for making me feel safe.

This is exactly what I am talking about. I have literally emailed not a soul nor tweeted about this since I joined this discussion to share my feelings. Yet many of you felt it necessary to include the entire twittersphere and collude on what to say here.

[mikeal]

@brianloveswords I'm not an admin :( but @isaacs can.

[mikeal]

I have literally emailed not a soul nor tweeted about this since I joined this discussion to share my feelings.

You've sent @isaacs and I 3 emails today.

[CodeFoodPixels]

@malandrew It's a public discussion, if people feel the want or need to include others then it's sort of the whole point. Whether it's by twitter, facebook, email or word of mouth doesn't matter.

[andrewdeandrade]

FWIW, I'd like to publicly apologize for my use of the word lynch. I'm used to using that word in Portuguese as well as English and that word does not have the same racial connotations that is does in English.

[andrewdeandrade]

You've sent @isaacs and I 3 emails today.

Yes, because I assumed both of you are community leaders here. I guess I emailed the wrong people. Who was I supposed to email when I feel the CoC has been breached? I'm trying to do the right thing and contact the appropriate people because something was said which I felt was totally offensive.

[mikeal]

@malandrew I won't post the contents of your email publicly without your consent but I will say that the emails don't ask for any CoC enforcement and my assumption was that you were just messaging us privately in order to let us know your opinion without posting it publicly. If you want some kind of enforcement please reply again requesting it and include @othiym23 since he is the only one who knows the enforcement procedures as he is in the middle of drafting them.

[andrewdeandrade]

@mikeal Sorry if I was unclear. Yes, I'm asking for CoC enforcement. No, I don't want them to be public. I would like an apology. I'll reply back with Forrest on the email.

[marclove]

Sad to see once again the dominate and privileged voices get all the attention. This thread is a perfect example of what a healthy community should squash way before it gets to this point. An effort to communicate that the community is welcoming to a large variety of people, has devolved into delivering the message that it is not that at all.