Add Code of Conduct #3484
Add Code of Conduct #3484
Conversation
Verbatim copy of the Contributor Covenant, found here: http://contributor-covenant.org/
|
👍 |
|
I don't like the idea of Code of Conduct in general. It's not that I like to insult people, but Code of Conduct brings more problems than it solves. There are bad people, and there will ever be. Having a code on conduct is a way of saying "Don't be a jerk" (quoted from someone on gitter, I don't remember whom), and jerks don't care about code of conduct anyway. Some people (like me) also have problem with Code of Conduct because of their subjectivity. In the one you proposed, there is this line:
What is ethic? What isn't? What is professional? What is unprofessional? Am I in this category by using the word There is an interesting repository called [
And this kind of endlessly debates is frequent (yep, I probably started one here). An example is this one where a 374 comment thread has been started on some personal (not project-related) opinions of one of its developer. Then arguments like this appears:
(Notice how the person feeling unwelcome starts also to be "mean" by calling the other What I want to show with this discussion is: Everybody as different opinions and there is no right/wrong opinions. Proposing a Code of Conduct is promoting some people opinions against other people. It avoid the projects maintainers loosing energy in endless debates. Subjective rules allow people to feel offended for anything... what if I told you I feel offended by your The best system is to let people interact without If we really need to have rules, I would prefer something close to
To not enter into an endless debate, I'll probably not post further comments, my opinion having been exposed here. And at the end, it's only up to the project maintainer to decide which direction he want to take 😃 |
|
The software industry actively marginalises women, people of colour, etc. In software, you can't trust people to treat each other with respect because software culture on the whole is toxic. A code of conduct is a minimum measure you can put in place to try to carve out a safe space, because at least you can hit people on the head with a code of conduct when they cross the line. My vote goes to a CoC. |
|
I vote for a CoC too |
|
I'm against CoC, especially on github which is not a platform with the right tooling for this, I could write a book about this but let it be simple please and just adopt NCoC only truly responsible text:
|
|
Also all contributors have to agree on the terms of use of GitHub and all chatters have to agree with the terms of use of Gitter. If there is any issue with unfair use, users can report it to the appropriate paid persons (far more capable than me since experts in their domain) of these organizations. |
|
👍 for a CoC:
|
|
On the same page with @syl20bnr and @StreakyCobra. Don't see any point in CoC, since it usually changes nothing - trolls gonna troll anyway and you can't do nothing with it without GitHub stuff. |
|
I went back and forth on this but here's my position: There will always be one or two people get butthurt over SOMETHING. Who read into something a little bit too much. Remember, all communication is text-based and it's VERY hard to decipher intent, for example I'm very terse, which can come off a bit...rude -- but never is my intent; I just don't beat around the bush when I give my opinions. Some would find that violates this proposed CoC -- it's kinda BS, because I actually add value to the project. |
|
🎉 🎈 🍭 |
SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR TIME@robbyoconnor I'm gonna quote you, but it's more about addressing the values you're advocating, rather than being directly about you. :) 😬OK, so if someone submits a PR with A project is more than just the code. If you measure your contribution to a project only by your technical contribution, you miss out on the social aspect. If your project does amazing good at code stuff, but you leave a trail of dead, burnt out people-husks on the way, I'd say there's a problem. I'm gonna check out from this thread unless I'm explicitly summoned. |
|
@chrisbarrett -- LOL -- Holy Shit -- I love you right now 😀 |
|
We are all indeed adults capable of having adult discussions, but people are complicated, and even reasonable people can have different ideas about what is respectful. These rules are just a way of making explicit what is already implicit to the community. The point isn't to burden everyone with a bunch of annoying rules, to shame people publicly, or to act against someone for wrongdoing. Rather, the point is to help us all build a pleasant, productive, and fearless community. Doing so by helping them understand how their behaviors might be impacting the project and the people who want to be a part of it. In case something gnarly occurs (knocks wood), there will be a set of guidelines in place. IMO, without a CoC it is very hard to bring up something that we think should be addressed. ❤️ 💚 💜 💙 💛 |
Agree. Actually I'm not satisfied about the CoC proposed here and I'm also not satisfied with the NCoC I pasted above. I will make a draft and explain the motivation behind it. |
|
I changed my mind back to wanting it -- I never was firmly against it A few good CoC (just examples): |
|
The very successful 😃 Code of Conflict of the Linux Kernel can be found here |
YES YES YES YES! This works for us with a few tweaks. One of the downsides to a CoC is questions like:
|
why not? Just curious... |
|
@fommil You linked the #emacs channel CoC, and I see newbies being disrespected there almost every day... as mentioned above, the Linux project has a CoC too, but it's not hard to see how rude people can be there. On the other hand, Spacemacs has no CoC and it's one of friendlier communities out there. Just check the Gitter chat logs. Isn't that what matters in the end? :) |
|
OK. Sorry for the noise. |
|
To be clear here:
Thank you. |
@fommil wow this is a bit over the top statement here. Are we talking about what Spacemacs tries to achieve or about a Code of Conduct ??!! Goals =/= Rules for people to interact in a respectful manner. |
|
@fommil you are welcome to share your view here, please be respectful and allow the discussion to be fair and symmetrical. |
|
This is funny how a thread about a CODE OF CONDUCT ends up in threats of boycott, refusal to discuss, ultimatum etc... First time I have to lock a thread in almost 5000 issues. |
|
It's not about what you've written down somewhere, it's about what you practice. Do we want future spacemacs community discussion to regress to finger pointing over the minutiae of section foo article bar of the holy code of conduct? What exactly will be done if one is judged to have run afoul? Will their PRs and bug reports be closed based on their creator's sins, not their technical merit? I'm reminded of this amusing exchange on Would the situation have been improved with a document to invoke on the troll? The most we can do with trolls is not engage them, and should a line be crossed, remove them from the environment through force (by engaging GitHub/Gitter's user agreement or relevant laws). If adding a code of conduct will not add to our existing courses of action, it seems to be a rather distracting and agenda driven endeavour. e: It's somewhat analogous to the proliferating standards meme--we should simply go with the human standard of courtesy. |
|
IANAL but the law (and the policies of service providers such as GitHub) basically give owners ultimate authority over which individuals are allowed to participate in their projects. If someone is being toxic, then @syl20bnr is well within his rights to press whatever ban button is available to him. And that's the end of the story. But that's actually not the whole story. By adopting the Contributor Covenant (CC), what @syl20bnr would effectively be doing is making a promise to the public that he will be responsible for enforcing its terms. However, these terms state:
So in order to keep his promise, @syl20bnr has to "take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any instances of unacceptable behavior" made by his contributors outside of the project community. He obviously can't do that. No project owner has time to keep tabs on what all his contributors are doing in their regular lives. So that alone is reason enough to question the CC. What man wants to make a promise he can't keep? But the CC doesn't actually expect him to do that. What actually happens is that random activists are going to be the ones who will keep tabs on Spacemacs contributors. If a spacemacs contributor does anything, anywhere, at any point in time, that the activists perceive as violating the CC, then the activists will petition @syl20bnr to ban that person. It doesn't matter who those activists are, or how important the person they want banned may be to the project. The decision is no longer @syl20bnr's to make. He has to ban that person. Because he made a promise to enforce the CC, which applies universally. But what's even more revealing is this paragraph:
Quoth the Contributor Covenant. If @syl20bnr doesn't acquiesce to the demands of the activists, then he himself becomes a violator of the CC and is therefore fair game for attack. But since he's the owner, there's no one the activists can petition in order to get him banned. The only other course of action is public shaming. The activists will go on Twitter and accuse him of supporting whatever bad thing his contributor did in his spare time. The activists might even get smear pieces published in the media that will show up in his Google search results. Now these things could arguably happen anyway, even if @syl20bnr doesn't choose to adopt the CC. Activists can theoretically attack whomever they dislike. But it certainly doesn't help to adopt a policy that makes the activists look like the good guys when they do it. So in my humble opinion, @syl20bnr would be well advised to adopt a more sensible code of conduct, that doesn't deprive him of authority over his own project. Just my 2¢. Thanks for reading. |
|
Well said, @jart. In this very thread there are attempts to force @syl20bnr's hand through thinly veiled threats of just such activism. It's telling that for some it is not the actual content of the code, but whether one exists or not, (as a kind of signalling badge) which is the main point of contention. |
|
What about a code of conduct that any Social Justice Warrior be banned from the project? I.e. any person suggesting that any criterion beyond code quality be used to judge contributions has nothing to do in an open-source project. |
|
It seems like a totally different crowd shows up to CoC issues than for the issues about the actual software. @fare Also terms like "Social Justice Warrior" clearly communicate that all you want to do is quarrel over discussing. My opinion on the subject: value the voices and opinions of the regular contributors since they are the ones governed by the chosen CoC. Don't let externs drag the project into their slugfest. |
|
Do not allow any one group to dominate. --Rob
|
|
@jart awesome and lucid analysis of the issue(s) around that particular CoC. @cpaulik what @jart said. @fare there are a couple ruggedized CoCs designed for exactly that. This variation of Rosarior's original code of merit has specific language to exclude SJWs, but IMO terms like "social justice warrior" are pejoratives (labeled as such by the OED) and referencing these in any official document will cause more trouble than it solves. @kritzcreek definitely. I was just expressing an opinion on a project I'm a fan of, and have seen other projects bitten by these CoCs before. These decisions should be left to the creator and core contributors, but sometimes the extended community can provide a data point or two. Back to the grindstone... |
|
I am sorry if this is a stupid question, but I contribute as a hobby, as I am finding less and less chance to actually use an editor I'm my day job. I have no experience with CoC and in my world have rarely heard of them, so what is the main intent of having this document? Is it something that is legally binding? Is it simply to coerce people in being nice to each other? The problem I have is how do we enforce it? I see a few have brought this up already, but I have not seen any response that answers it. @syl20bnr already has ultimate authority, but as he is not an admin at Github, the most he can do is not accept PR's from someone. Even if that were the case, it wouldn't be difficult for someone with a grudge to just fork and maintain there own copy where they would be able to continue. It wouldn't stop anyone from also being negative outside of Github like on reddit. If it is a list of rules to abide by with no enforcement whatsoever couldn't we just put a smiley face in the Readme and ask people to be nice? I can see it would be nice to have something to point to for people that are acting out, to ensure they are aware that there behavior is undesired. However, I don't see how you can make them read it or abide by it, unless I am missing something. Again, I am sorry if sounding ignorant, but honestly, that's what I am in regards to this matter. I see there are quite a few people that feel very strongly about this and I didn't want to offend anyone. |
|
If you need a book of rules to not act like a douchebag - I have bad news for you 😄 I don't like 💩 like this. It will lead to something like "if this is not in the book that it's allowed" Trolls really enjoy working around rules. Also "enforcers" tend to bend rules when they want to. So it doesn't protect anyone from anything. It's just create a focal point for this kind of "unproductive activities." Suddenly all kind of "warriors" gonna start asking for adding extra rules. Or removing them. Not only it's a win-lose situation that can lead to some kind of unnecessary crap, but also who has time for this???????? |
@Ralesi Haha, @robbyoconnor has a lot of job just because people DON'T read (not all, but you get the idea) :)
I am with you on this ;) |
I'm no lawyer but that is not how I see it since the CC clearly states
This would only be the case when you are e.g. give an "official" talk about Spacemacs or if you are an organiser of a, hypothetical, Spacemacs Hackathon. I also disagree with your second point since the CC clearly states:
and not by activists or warriors of any kind. @Ralesi @sooheon I am also not sure if it makes a practical difference. But I think it is mainly about newcomers. Anybody working in the spacemacs community for a while knows that we did not have any problems. At least AFAIK. But there are people out there who might have experienced harassment in the past. They would be more likely to contribute if they can see a clear statement that the spacemacs community will not leave them alone if it would happen again. |
|
@d12frosted Yes I've edited my post. For me the CC is just another CoC 😄 |
So you are saying that the default position for a project on GitHub is "we allow harassment" ? I also think that there are people who aren't some kind of internet predators, but they are fed up with the PC bullies, professional victims and they might decide to not be a part of the community if we go over the top with "sensitivity". But without explaining every single detail of what is "harassment" CoC is worthless. It's better to rely on the common sense and if you have some kind of condition and you asked someone to not trigger you but he\she\it won't stop - you can use ignore.. And other people too... It's not that hard - like couple clicks. |
Well I hope not. But since harassment happens everywhere online I would be surprised if Github would be the odd one out. Continuing my hypothetical example: So if somebody was harassed on Github before and the project management did nothing about it. Then seeing any CoC in a Project repo would be a good thing for this person.
IDK e.g. if somebody calls somebody else one of the 7 words you can not say on TV
Again IDK. It seems to me that people on both sides should chill out a little bit and value context over content. |
What if the first project also had CoC ? It's like backstabbing. And if someone did something to the offender will it revert the trauma? 😕
That's pretty much why I say "Can we not"? I think after things like this and that I started to suffer from some kind of "I want to leave this planet" syndrome... Can we just code? 😕
And pretty much every place on the Internet, especially online video games, have CoC... 😄 |
|
@cpaulik I contend that it makes no difference to reasonable contributing newcomers. Introspection should make this self evident--when you were first inspired to join this community, did you search the repo with bated breath for a satisfactory code of conduct? You enjoyed the project's features, and maybe thought to add your contribution. Those who look for the code of conduct specifically, and hinge their participation in the community on the existence of a CoC, are motivated by activism and ingroup psychology, not improvement of the project. In all of these codes of conduct, there is not a single surprising assertion. It's a lot of verbal ostentation to proclaim what, exactly? Basic human decency? And if the end result does not offer any more binding enforcement, then it truly is without substance. After all, in the case of true harassment, we would find recourse in the law, not in a code of conduct. Rather, a CoC is a signifier of establishment, of middle-manager speak and ingroup and outgroup. See how quickly maintainers of flycheck and ensime moved to browbeat @syl20bnr with the weight of their respective projects and their audiences for not immediately leaping to join this ingroup. It didn't matter that @syl20bnr has been a courteous, and reasonable benevolent dictator, and has encouraged such in all public discourse. In fact, he did not even dismiss the CoC outright, simply expressed his opinion and reservations. However, not falling in line and proudly brandishing a code of conduct like all reasonable in-groupers is grounds for ostracism (going so far as to claim the project's goals are "in conflict"). e: In conclusion, I find it risible that some would see a literal CoC as either necessary or sufficient to actual good conduct. In daily interaction, we do not proudly proclaim codes of conduct in various formulations for every group we join (in fact when we see people point to pieces of paper in place of actual interaction in real life, we recognize it for what it is: bureaucracy). We associate with those whose conduct we find acceptable, dissociate from others, and in cases which cross the line, we invoke actual legal authority. On the internet of all places, we should strive to be as free, rather than willingly bury ourselves under pseudo-legal officialese. Still, I recognize at this point the political cost for not having some form of code of conduct will be non-negligible. I can only wish @syl20bnr the best in formulating a sensible, minimally cringe-inducing, document which doesn't unnecessarily shackle his own decision-making. Godspeed! :) |
|
@sooheon 👍 |
|
@sooheon No, introspection can not make this self evident. Since I have never had any problems with stuff like this I can in no way claim that I know what it is like to come to a new project with another background of experiences. I also thought that flycheck and ensime people behaved not very nice, bordering on rude. But again I don't really know why they did so or what experience they had in the past that makes them value a CoC so much more than I do. I still think it is better to make it explicit that we value, as you called it correctly, basic human decency. @JAremko I don't understand what the big deal in the links you posted is. Personally I don't care if it is master/slave, leader/follower or primary/replica. So if somebody with a different background takes offence with the master/slave terminology I have nothing against changing it. Especially since I have no idea what it is like to e.g. be a descendent of a slave. Same with the suicide. I could see how reading this word over and over can be very upsetting if e.g. your brother committed suicide. So why not be nice about it, change it and that's it. No big deal. |
We all are. It was a worldwide practice. But not all are trying to hijack it for the personal benefits. Interesting fact:
People of my ethnic group still call themselves Slavs. It means that the word "slave" should sound to us as if it was "blacks" for black people 😄 And no one gets triggered for some reason and probably never was. I think the difference is that it's not profitable to us. But for some "being offended" become a really neat business model. And until it changes until we draw a line somewhere those things will never become the past and people will seek for a reason to be offended.
The problem is that there is no way to tell if someone is legitimately hurt or just trying to feel important and powerful by race/gander baiting. It's a new way to harass people while claiming to be a victim. And it's not about fixing injustice - its about being the "language police". They'll always find another "offensive" word to ban, come up with another "good" reason. They're making words magic like if they have power or even a proper meaning without a context. But I think this thread becomes one of those things that I linked... I'll better unsubscribe before it's too late. 😄 |
|
@JAremko Yeah, you are mostly right. I still fail to see how this is a business model for anybody and I also don't like to assume such "evil" intentions. Anyway I'll close my participation with a link to The Coddling of the American Mind. |
|
i'll just leave this nugget here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fxTb5nTavQ After all, it's about CoC Now I need to wash my brain in alcohol, it hurts 😕 Good thing it's Friday 😄 |
|
A new document has been added to the repository, this is our version of the "CoC" which is simply called |
|
An explanation about its contents. First, thanks to the excellent talk posted by @JAremko I realized that the |
|
@syl20bnr I like |
|
A major update has been pushed to the develop branch. |
|
I'm happy this is how it is :) |
|
When it comes to activists intruding upon Emacs community projects, attempting to coerce the institution of rules and policies to effect their political agendas, I think we should respond thusly:
No Emacs-related project should exclude members of other projects, boycott other projects, or discourage participation in other projects because of any difference of opinion over non-technical matters. Such divisiveness weakens the community, discourages participation in the Emacs community, and holds back progress in improving software. And bravo to Sylvain for writing a sensible, honest, hacker-style, results-oriented document that goes above and beyond mere words and feelings. |
As Spacemacs is becoming more popular and gaining more contributors, I suggest adding a Code of Conduct in order to foster a more inclusive community.
I included a verbatim copy of the Contributor Covenant, found here:
http://contributor-covenant.org/
Additionally, it could be linked from the contribution guide and/or the README. I could add those links if needed.