On 06/10/2022 12:39:
> Hi everyone,
>
> The Document Foundation has updated its Code of Conduct, the set of
> guidelines that explains to our contributors and users what behaviours
> and interactions we value:
>
> https://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/code-of-conduct/
It is deeply disappointing to me that in a community committed to
transparency - the first time I see or have input into this text is when
it is published as law. This despite having done the work as half of the
CoC committee for the last many years, and having helped to tweak and
introduce the previous compromise policy. How did we fail that hard ?
When we last did a CoC change we had wide discussion and input from
many perspectives. We had a talk with feedback from the Rome conference
(we had a perfect opportunity to do the same only days ago in Milan -
was that deliberately missed?). When this appeared on the board agenda I
asked about it privately to Sophie and the directors, and got nothing.
Previously we had a carefully balanced pair of people: Bubli (later
Sophie) and myself chosen to give confidence to any reporter and/or
person reported against that they might have someone that can empathize
with their perspective - so we could (ideally) achieve a quiet
resolution, reconciliation and quickly restore peace, reducing
escalations. That had minor tweaks over time.
In contrast - it seems that this policy has been written in secret
has a large volume of novel text and lots of quirks - eg. being based on
an obsolete version of the Contributor Covenant for no obvious reason
(the newer 2.1 is unsurprisingly better).
I've not, as yet, had a chance to fully read the text, but the
process so far needlessly burns my trust in the balance of the result.
As the only coder on this new CoC committee (and having been
unilaterally volunteered by others to enforce something I've not had a
chance to read) - I'm seriously considering my position.
Unfortunately it is not the first time that this approach has been
used which I can characterize as:
* a small group plans & drafts in secret
* it decides not to include known interested or affected
people around the topic
* public / wider discussion and input is avoided
* it suddenly dumps a big chunk of new rules on the community
* no time is allowed for input
* there is a rush to vote against an imposed deadline
This has been used before to give really poor results and to
significantly re-shape the community. There appears to be no reason for
things to be done in this way. It is a really unfortunate way to work
that damages trust.
It also appears to conceive of those with different views as being
fundamentally the problem - to be excluded - rather than a resource to
collaborate with to make something widely acceptable to everyone for the
good of TDF.
This is a particularly wasted opportunity - because a new CoC (with
which I have no problem in principle[1]) can give a useful point to
reset our discourse as a community and to draw a line under some of the
past unhelpful behavior. An opportunity for a fresh start from a new
place that improves some of our interactions. Basing that on the trust
re-built in-person at the conference is a great idea in principle.
However - bouncing this through, in this way, without notice or
discussion looks extremely rude. It is not how a community I'm happy to
be part of should behave. It is far from inclusive.
Perhaps when I have more calm & space - I'll try to work out if
there is any genuine willingness to engage with improving the text. From
a quick skim some details look quite problematic.
In general there is substantial scope for mis-use (or even just the
damaging appearance of it) around CoC enforcement and we need to build
confidence that we will get this right.
At a bare minimum I would expect each individual behind this,
-particularly- if they are on the new CoC committee, to at least -try-
to repair the situation by re-assuring the community that (despite
apparently excluding people & views during the process of creating and
pushing this initiative through) - that when actually enforcing the CoC
they will respectfully listen to all views and act in an inclusive and
balanced way.
Regards,
Michael.
[1] - the latest Contributor Covenant is rather less problematic than in
the past
--
michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity
Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks
(M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
