Here's the ASF code as a starting point: https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html
Was the nature of these incidents covered by that? On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 06:02 Myrle Krantz <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey all, > > We have had a couple of incidents now of what can be interpreted as > misbehavior. There has been room for interpretation as to whether it > actually was misbehavior. There will almost always *be* room for > interpretation. Sometimes this will be by design, and sometimes it will be > accidental. > > We are approaching an emotional topic, and we can expect people to feel and > express anger, disappointment, frustration, confusion, and more. But we > also hope to talk to and convince people who are afraid, hurt, sad, > jealous, and more. The latter is true both for people who we've had > trouble including in our communities, and among those community members who > may not see the need for diversity and inclusion work. > > We need to talk about what are acceptable ways to express our feelings on > our lists, and we need to find ways to talk about it when our boundaries > are crossed or when we believe others are being mistreated. We need to be > able to do this without limiting our ability to approach difficult topics > and exchange unpopular opinions and unpleasant facts. > > Social contracts without consequences cannot succeed. So we will also need > to talk about what consequences we wish to apply when a participant > repeatedly and willfully crosses boundaries. We need some of those > consequences to be low-key, and even loving, because otherwise we will > hesitate to apply them until a conversation has already left the rails. > But we also need at least one tool in our toolbox for removing the > (vanishingly rare) "true villain" who wants us to fail, and is actively > working to undermine us. > > I believe we will need different standards for our different lists > (private@diversity, dev@diversity, diversity@). On diversity@ I'm willing > to be very tolerant, because it is a sort of "user" list. On private@ I > expect us to keep traffic as low as possible, regardless of content. So > what I'm most interested in talking about right now is CoC and enforcement > specifically on our working list: dev@diversity. But our other lists will > come up in this conversation too. > > Best Regards, > Myrle > > 1.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory > 2.) "When hawks give rise to doves: The evolution and transition of > enforcement strategies" > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3675804/ > 3.) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-38323-7 >
