I initially hesitated to add to this discussion because I think any CoC is better than none, and I'd rather let more active members choose one swiftly, than needlessly bikeshed the issue. So by all means, do simply choose one that seems good enough and then let's move on.
But then it occurred to me there's also a strategic concern here: is this an opportunity to help popularise a CoC that may feasibly, eventually, become the official OSM one? I don't recall if there currently are active OSM CoC contenders or if all past attempts have been abandoned; maybe someone here could simply provide us with a recommendation whether there is a suitable alternative there. A second alternative could be the HOT CoC we adopted last year. It is the result of extensive consultation and lessons learned, incorporates aspects of many prior CoCs, and is specifically designed for a diverse and global community that meets in both online and offline spaces: https://www.hotosm.org/hot_code_of_conduct In the end however I opt for "least effort" -- the GF one is surely a good choice too. I simply thought these options are worth raising as well. M. On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 at 18:54, Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have put the GF one as a draft on the OSM wiki: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct > > Feel free to edit it as appropriate. At some point I'll go through and > add the suggestions. > > On 28/02/18 15:27, Blake Girardot wrote: > > From my perspective, and I am not sure why it is left out of > > geekfeminism's policy is that item one under "Harassment includes" > > should list "national origin, cultural affiliation" to address the > > issue of people making offensive comments about people from > > particular countries or cultures. > > Agreed. "national origin" has been included in anti-racism laws in the > UK since the 1960s. > > > We might even include something like "OpenStreetMap participation > > style" in that list so we do not have to tolerate disparaging remarks > > about remote mappers, craft mappers, newbie mappers or folks that > > participate through non-mapping contributions. > > Broadly in favour. Ilya Zverik said: > > > OpenStreetMap needs everything. More editors, more tutorials, more > > > rendering styles, more mappers, more software. Anyone has something > > to contribute, although most don’t know what to do. > > http://blog.opencagedata.com/post/openstreetmap-interview-ilya-zverev-level0 > > Is there a chance a broad wording could be interpreted as "Don't > criticize reckless, bad faith, mapping *ever*"? 🤔 I wouldn't want that. > > > And I would change or add to the first line "Offensive or > > disparaging comments..." because "disparaging" or "derogatory" are > > open to much less debate than the very subjective "offensive". How > > many endless discussions will there be (or have their been) about > > what is offensive as opposed to the somewhat easier to identify, > > disparaging or derogatory comment. > > Agreed. "offensive" is vague and can be used against marginalized people > (e.g. "LGBTQ rights are offensive my sincerely held religious beliefs"). > Usually I use "harmful", but those work too. > > On 01/03/18 19:13, Paul Norman wrote: > > A couple of issues I would consider if I were doing the selection > > again are readability and education or socioeconomic status. > Classism is a harmful thing, so I agree we should put that in. > > Better readability makes it easier for non-native English speakers. > > > Rory > > _______________________________________________ > Diversity-talk mailing list > Code of Conduct: TBD > Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
_______________________________________________ Diversity-talk mailing list Code of Conduct: TBD Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
