Whoops, forgot to CC community@:
Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > De: amin...@gmail.com > Fecha: 5 de abril de 2017, 19:25:14 CDT > Para: Jakub Daniel <jakub.dan...@gmail.com> > Cc: librar...@haskell.org > Asunto: Re: [Haskell-community] Civility notes (was "Traversable instances > for (, , ) a b") > > > >> El 5 abr 2017, a las 13:20, Jakub Daniel <jakub.dan...@gmail.com> escribió: >> >> What is the expected effect/role of CoC? Is it expected that people would >> actually exhibit different behaviour because of a document? Is there a >> reason to believe good behaviour in other communities come from existing >> CoCs? I honestly doubt people prone to violate such rules tend to read such >> documents and since there is no way to enforce it, what point is there? > > If you'll forgive a strained metaphor: imagine you arrive in an unfamiliar > land, one which has a reputation for the occasional food fight. You're > wearing nice clothes and don't want your day ruined by getting food on them. > Some restaurants have a big sign out front: "Absolutely NO food fighting. > Anyone caught food fighting will be ejected". Other restaurants don't have > the sign. When picking a place to eat, aren't you likely to gravitate to a > restaurant which has a sign? > >> Isn't the effort to maintain such a document just a waste? > > Hopefully it'll be very low-maintenance! > > Tom > > > >> >>> On 5 Apr 2017, at 20:54, amin...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> I'm also +1 to a CoC, although have less of an opinion on what shape it >>> should take. CoCs are an effective way of making people who may feel like >>> outsiders to a community feel more welcome. The Haskell community is >>> amazing and inclusive but not the most diverse, and projects which are >>> doing better on that front largely all have CoCs. >>> >>> In terms of what shape it takes: there are lots of off-the-shelf ones for >>> different needs: I'd suggest picking one of them. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>>> El 5 abr 2017, a las 11:44, Paolo Giarrusso <p.giarru...@gmail.com> >>>> escribió: >>>> >>>> Rust's code of conduct (and the conduct of leaders) have been very >>>> successful at creating a welcoming community. However, those rules were >>>> there from the start. >>>> >>>> What's crucial is that a code of conduct is really agreed upon by a >>>> community and its elders. So thanks to Simon Peyton Jones for starting >>>> this conversation. >>>> In particular, a CoC to address known issues (not just in the present >>>> discussion) would probably be easier to agree on. >>>> >>>> > We should *assume* people set out to be kind and courteous and help them >>>> > do that consistently. >>>> >>>> The guideline I find useful is "assume good faith" (used for instance in >>>> Wikipedia), as long as you don't have extraordinary evidence. And that's a >>>> guidelines that needs to be stated. >>>> Opinions on politeness in the wild are much more varied. How polite do you >>>> need to be, if somebody insists on being wrong? And with actual trolls? >>>> >>>> > Why is the idea that "everything is a tradeoff" enshrined as a rule? >>>> >>>> I don't know if it's a strict rule there, how strict it should be, or >>>> whether it works in a CoC. But I find it a very good guideline for >>>> educated debate. I learned it (implicitly) in my academic PL training: PL >>>> design is founded on math but is no science yet. Debate in hard sciences >>>> is different. >>>> >>>> Because this rule is in fact fundamental to establish respect under >>>> disagreement. The Rust CoC says "There is *seldom* a right answer." If a >>>> question has a right answer, the others become wrong, misguided, heretics, >>>> .... idiots... OK, you can censor the word "idiot", but that won't help >>>> much. Or you can admit that reasonable people might disagree on `Foldable >>>> ((,) a)` (as most already agree), and give that as a guideline, just as >>>> "assume good faith". That doesn't make "2 + 2 = 5" legitimate of >>>> course—some "common sense" is still needed. >>>> >>>> "There is *seldom* a right answer" is an unstated rule in academic papers >>>> (where it's implied by peer review), and it IMHO works rather well there, >>>> even on the few academics who will loudly proclaim elsewhere there is a >>>> right answer. >>>> >>>> Indeed, I don't want to misrepresent SPJ, but I feel he is often happy to >>>> talk about Haskell tradeoffs when they're there, even when others loudly >>>> proclaim Haskell is strictly and clearly better than X. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Paolo >>>> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2017 10:55, "Tikhon Jelvis" <tik...@jelv.is> wrote: >>>>> Personally, I would not be against a *short and simple* code of conduct >>>>> that specifically addresses issues we have seen. I'm imagining clear >>>>> guidelines that help people express themselves in a thoughtful and polite >>>>> way. Something in the style of the Hacker News commenting guidelines[1] >>>>> (at least the first four; the rest are specific to HN/Reddit-like sites). >>>>> >>>>> One of the best examples I've seen in the wild had a single rule: no >>>>> personal attacks. It's simple to understand and follow with no risk of >>>>> stifling or derailing real discussions, and yet unambiguously rules out >>>>> the majority of rude comments I see online (ignoring spam and outright >>>>> trolling). >>>>> >>>>> I do *not* like Rust's code of conduct specifically. It does not provide >>>>> clear guidelines on civility/politeness and covers too many other things, >>>>> including a lot of (often political) baggage. Why is the idea that >>>>> "everything is a tradeoff" enshrined as a rule? The rule on politeness is >>>>> clearly deemphasized: "Please be kind and courteous. There’s no need to >>>>> be mean or rude." is so vague it may as well not be in the code of >>>>> conduct. We should *assume* people set out to be kind and courteous and >>>>> help them do that consistently. The "Citizen Code of Conduct" they link >>>>> to has even more baggage and I believe it should *not* serve as the basis >>>>> for anything we might adopt as a community. >>>>> >>>>> [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html see section "In >>>>> Comments" >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Simon Peyton Jones via Haskell-community >>>>>> <haskell-community@haskell.org> wrote: >>>>>> Friends >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I second what Tom says below. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Almost everyone expresses their views with respect, even when >>>>>> disagreeing. The exceptions are (in my guess) mostly unintentional, at >>>>>> least in the extent of the offence caused. That does not make them >>>>>> unimportant, because a slow slippage in our collective standards is, >>>>>> over time corrosive. But it does mean that we can draw breath, as Tom >>>>>> has helpfully done here, and without condemning anyone reset our >>>>>> standards. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’ve been talking to a couple of people about whether it would be useful >>>>>> to have an explicit Haskell Community Code of Conduct. Many online >>>>>> communities have one (e.g. Rust), and it might be helpful for everyone >>>>>> to have a concrete baseline rather than an unwritten standard. Any >>>>>> views on that? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Simon >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Libraries [mailto:libraries-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Tom >>>>>> Murphy >>>>>> Sent: 02 April 2017 19:18 >>>>>> To: Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiex...@gmail.com> >>>>>> Cc: libraries <librar...@haskell.org> >>>>>> Subject: Civility notes (was "Traversable instances for (,,) a b") >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Fumiaki! >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with you that some poorly-chosen words by a few people have >>>>>> soured this conversation, but please don't let that turn you completely >>>>>> off of the productive conversation most of us are attempting to have! I >>>>>> think it's largely been successful, too: even if many of us haven't >>>>>> changed our -1/+1 votes, I for one have had my ideas challenged and have >>>>>> a more nuanced view than before talking with everyone here. >>>>>> Henning and Edward are two examples (one from each side of the >>>>>> +1/-1 chasm) who have been aided by this discussion, in making important >>>>>> progress to finding a middle ground (each in the form of proposed >>>>>> compiler changes). >>>>>> >>>>>> To the rest of us: Fumiaki regretting having posted here is a >>>>>> pretty stark example of why speaking politely matters. People being >>>>>> scared away and feeling unwelcome is a real phenomenon, and we need to >>>>>> do our part to fix it. I'd propose: >>>>>> >>>>>> - If you haven't read it already, SPJ recently wrote a heartfelt >>>>>> letter on the subject [0]. We've gotten better since then, but clearly >>>>>> we're not finished. >>>>>> - Civility is a norm, and norms sometimes need to be enforced. From >>>>>> a distance, we all look bad (and unwelcoming!) if anyone is hostile and >>>>>> we don't make it clear it's not acceptable. Speak up! That said, >>>>>> everyone makes mistakes - try to give people space to apologize and move >>>>>> on. >>>>>> - If someone says something insulting to you, please take that as a >>>>>> sign to become more polite, not less so. The downward spiral is real. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you're called out for saying something regrettable (again, >>>>>> regardless of if you're +1 or -1 on this issue), *please* take our >>>>>> desire for civil conversation seriously. Responses like (I'm >>>>>> paraphrasing, and not trying to cite anyone specifically): "It was a >>>>>> joke (mostly)" and "It's your fault if you didn't get the joke" are >>>>>> worse than not writing anything at all. Ideal would be a quick "Sorry!" >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, all! >>>>>> Tom >>>>>> >>>>>> [0] https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2016-September/024995.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiex...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> The discussion has diverged to flaming due to a few offensive people. I >>>>>> guess I shouldn't have posted a proposal here, I should have submitted a >>>>>> patch instead. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2017-03-23 19:53 GMT+09:00 Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiex...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> It's surprising that they are missing (forgive me, I'm not here to make >>>>>> people grumpy). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Libraries mailing list >>>>>> librar...@haskell.org >>>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Haskell-community mailing list >>>>>> Haskell-community@haskell.org >>>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Haskell-community mailing list >>>>> Haskell-community@haskell.org >>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Haskell-community mailing list >>>> Haskell-community@haskell.org >>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Libraries mailing list >>> librar...@haskell.org >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries >> _______________________________________________ >> Libraries mailing list >> librar...@haskell.org >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________ Haskell-community mailing list Haskell-community@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
