Thanks, Chris. If Pycon AU adopts the LA code of conduct, that would make me (I speak personally) want MPUG to adopt it too. And many of the other reasons for it (MPUG organisers and presenters are also involved with Pycon, so their acceptance of the CoC is a given in many cases) would stand too. Let's say that we'd be adopting the Pycon AU CoC by reference, not by value.
Note that it's my opinion that a small user group has different dynamics than a big conference, so the language itself did not bother me much. I think the signaling aspect of having a CoC at all and the commitment of the organisers to take issues seriusly is much more important than the wording of the CoC. Having said that, it's always better to adopt a well-maintained document. For the reasons above I'm going to suggest on the MPUG list that we adopt the LA CoC too, "since it's the one used by Pycon AU". When do you expect/hope the Pycon AU organisation to make the decision to switch? J On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Chris Neugebauer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9 April 2015 at 04:06, Joshua Hesketh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The code of conduct isn't hard coded into the source but rather supplied > as > > part of the content management system built into zookeepr. This year the > URL > > is here: http://2015.pycon-au.org/register/code_of_conduct > > > > > > I'm actually surprised PyCon AU hasn't moved to Linux Australia's one > which > > has had a lot of work put into it and been exercised at multiple > different > > events (including debconf and others outside of just Linux Australia). I > > understand less people of MPUG may have seen it, but I personally don't > see > > that as a reason not to use it. > > > > There is no obvious license on the pyconau 2015 code of conduct so I'll > > leave that to others to reply. > > Javier, > > Some explanation as to the current code of conduct; some detailed > reasons as to why you shouldn't adopt it; and some reasons if you do > decide to adopt it, why you shouldn't link back to PyCon AU's instance > of it. > > A large part of the reason why PyCon AU has continued to use the older > CoC is inertia -- many PyCon sponsors (especially the Python Software > Foundation themselves) have required a declaration that a conference > would adopt a code of conduct before agreeing to sponsor. Pointing > back at an old Code of Conduct (which has been used successfully for > some years now) has been sufficient for that. > > Certainly when I was directly involved in the day-to-day running of > the conference, I was hesitant to change the code after telling the > sponsor what our decision was. > > This year I've been responding with the historical code and the LA > code. I've flagged with Clinton the intention of using the Linux > Australia code of conduct, and I believe consideration has been given > to this. > > My view is that MPUG should be adopting a LA's code of conduct, or a > variant thereof, rather than the historical PyCon AU one: > > - It is more detailed than PyCon AU's, but it covers all of the > provisions of the old PyCon AU code of conduct. > - Likewise, the LA code of conduct, written after PyCon AU's contains > many of identical provisions: enforcement rules, and the preamble, > were taken almost identically from the PyCon AU 2011 code. > - It is not location-specific -- PyCon AU's code specifies things > specific to the location of the conference. MPUG would need to fork > PyCon AU's code of conduct in order to make it appropriate to their > place of meeting. > - PyCon AU's code of conduct specifies in detail expected behaviour of > presenters[0], but much less so for delegates > - LA's code of conduct has been iterated by several organisations > other than LA, including Debconf, which has resulted in amending > language where the code has proved problematic to enforce [1][2]. > > As for whether you should be linking to PyCon AU's code directly, I > also say no: > - If you adopt the 2014 version, you'll be telling your members that > you'll alert Queensland police to incidents. > - the code will not remain static over the years. The current code > requires minor changes every two years. > - There is also the chance that we'll change the code completely (i.e. > to adopt LA's code of conduct). > > --Chris > > [0] A large part of this is, in my opinion, due to when the code was > written, and the concerns of the community at the time > [1] > https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/commit/b8dfbb633bdb7ad1d16dee39f746345b2b85cfd8 > [2] > https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/commit/043e78288a33615f8dca775ce0857c37e6a7f660 > > -- > --Christopher Neugebauer > > Jabber: [email protected] -- IRC: chrisjrn on irc.freenode.net -- > WWW: http://chris.neugebauer.id.au -- Twitter: @chrisjrn >
_______________________________________________ melbourne-pug mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
