Hi JC, On Freitag, 26. April 2024 13:01:12 CEST JC Brand wrote: > > Concretely, I propose that we add to 2.4 Be respectful, the following > > items on> > > the list of things to avoid: > >> - Use of racist, misogynistic, anti-trans, anti-gay, ableist slurs, or > >> other>> > >> derogatory pejoratives for oppressed identity groups against such > >> groups. > >> > >> - Blatantly racist, casteist, ableist, sexist, anti-trans, or otherwise > >> > >> offensive and bigoted discourse. > > FWIW, I don't think coming up with ever more fine-grained categorization > of what constitutes marginalized persons and putting that in the CoC is > the right way to go.
I disagree. There are two issues here. Issue 1: From the outside, it is not possible to distinguish two kinds of organisations/groups: - The kind of organisation which has truly engrained that people are people and that discrimination is not to be tolerated and thus does not see the necessity of enumerating marginalized groups it cares for. - The kind of organisation which does, in fact, not care for the well-being of marginalized groups inside of its structures at all. I would like the XSF to be clearly recognizable as an organisation which *does* care, even though we still have a long way to go for that to truly be in effect. Issue 2: With my MUC moderator hat on, I *need* that list. I need it (mostly) not for myself to know what's right and what's wrong, but I need it as a backing for that, when such specific problematic behaviour occurs, I know that I am within my mandate to act on it (and to point people at it, saving me a lot of time and energy). I do not have that if the CoC is handwaivy about equality (notes on that later). However, there surely are different ways to express this. Maybe wording like in the Contributor Covenant [1] are better suited? In fact, they have an excellent FAQ which may give some insights on why all of this is a good idea [2]. I'm not fixed on the specific phrasing; what's important to me is that the message is clear: discrimination and harassment is not being tolerated any number of attributes, and the attributes we're actually aware of need to be written down somewhere. > One can always come up with more categories of marginalized people, and > trying to enumerate all of them in a CoC is IMO impractical, while > mentioning only some of them can create the impression that some > categories of people are "more equal" than others. They are though, or should be anyway. People from marginalized groups are just that, marginalized. We as an organisation should do the extra effort to support individuals from these groups in order to allow them to be safe in our spaces, to live up to their potential and what they'd like to achieve and contribute. > At the end of the day, the tiniest minority is the individual, and > requiring that we treat each individual with respect and courtesy is > enough, without having to refer to specific (sometimes politically > charged) categories. Could you clarify "sometimes politically charged"? kind regards, Jonas [1]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/1/code_of_conduct/ [2]: https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
