> Some points that are missing are listed in the code of conduct in
the contributor covenant that jonas' posted.
>
> https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/1/code_of_conduct/
>
> for example age or caste.
>
>
> Can you give me some text that covers those, in a similar style?
sexual
I would change it to:
You are welcome at XSF Activities. Ensure that you are also welcoming of
others. We want everyone to feel welcome no matter what the color of
their skin, where they live, their socioeconomic status or where their
ancestors came from. We want to welcome people from all cultures, tribes
and religions, and of all sizes, shapes and ages. We want people to be
welcome no matter their gender identity and expression or sexual
orientation and identity. We want you to feel welcome no matter your
level of experience, ability or visible and invisible disability. We
want people to be welcome no matter their education, caste, citizenship
or immigration status. And we want you to help us make everyone else
feel welcomed, too.
>
>
> another good example is https://lgbtq.technology/coc.html
>
> some points that are not mentioned in the current CoC are:
>
> - pronouns
>
> What exactly would you say here?
I would say three things:
1.
as
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/participation/
and https://conduct.gnome.org/ say use inclusive language in rooms. no
"guys", "he/she".
you can see https://heyguys.cc/ for an example.
2.
Asking before assuming. For example what someone's preferred
pronoun is, if they want to be touched, whether they know anything about
a subject. If we are unsure, we ask for clarity. We also understand that
not all questions are OK, or need answering.
Don't assume what another person's pronouns are.
3.
Require pronouns in Events/Summits/Sprints/etc. next to name tags.
>
> - harassment.
>
> Harassment is right there in the list in 2.5.
Ah right sorry i missed that ^^
>
> - No debating the rights and lived experiences of marginalized
people in the community.
>
> I'm not entirely sure what this means. That could easily be my
ignorance - for the most part, I am not marginalized. But assuming it
means what I think it means, it doesn't sound respectful, friendly, or
supportive, and certainly not welcoming.
It basically aims to avoid situations like (substitute this as any other
marginalized person, this is from my own POV):
- Hey I am trans person and I have had hate crimes happen to me when I
walk down the street because of my hairy legs.
- "Hate crimes" don't exist
or
- I have friends that are trans people and I don't treat them like that.
or
- Maybe you misunderstood.
>
> - Deliberate misgendering or use of “dead” or rejected names
>
> I would hope this is overly specific - that is, it can't possibly be
seen as respectful or friendly or supportive.
>
> And for what it's worth, we've had multiple members change their names
Basically what jonas said in the thread already. There are a lot of
cases where a trans person goes through transition to some other sex.
This happens because trans people have *a lot* of dysphoria about their
birth bodies (voice, reproductive organs, hormones etc.) because they
don't feel like they are that.
So when transition happens they are becoming the person they *are*. This
is why "dead" naming is offensive. Because its at best what i was forced
to be not what I am.
>
> as some examples. a more complete also CoC can be found in the
JoinJabber Project
>
> https://joinjabber.org/about/community/codeofconduct/
>
> there is also a list at the bottom of the JoinJabber CoC that
links to other CoCs that informed it.
>
>
> Also gnome has a code of conduct here https://conduct.gnome.org/
>
> that says among others
>
> The GNOME community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over
privileged people’s comfort, for example in situations involving:
>
> “Reverse”-isms, including “reverse racism,” “reverse sexism,”
and “cisphobia”
> Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me
alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you.”
> Criticizing racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise
oppressive behavior or assumptions
> Communicating boundaries or criticizing oppressive behavior
in a “tone” you don’t find congenial
>
>
> Here be tygers - there's a risk, here, that the kinds of criticism
that certain people raised in the first round of this turns into a valid
one - that is, that bad behaviour can be justified if it's done "for a
good reason".
>
> That kind of pitfall was what prompted me to write section 2.2, actually.
I agree :)
Which is why in JoinJabber we added
> Basic expectations for conduct are not covered by the "reverse-ism"
clause and would be enforced irrespective of the demographics of those
involved. For example, racial discrimination will not be tolerated,
irrespective of the race of those involved. Nor would unwanted sexual
attention be tolerated, whatever someone's gender or sexual orientation.
Members of our community have the right to expect that participants in
the project will uphold these standards.
which gives us also something to fall back to.
>
> Lastly you can see also
https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Policy
>
> and https://kit.pyladies.com/en/latest/policies/coc.html
>
> that say among others also:
>
> Using welcoming and inclusive language. We’re accepting of
all who wish to take part in our activities, fostering an environment
where anyone can participate and everyone can make a difference.
>
> I think XEP-0458 covers this, in most if not all its sections.
"inclusive language" specifically no. It could be moderated according to
the line you wrote
> The purpose of a Code of Conduct is to ensure that our community is
as welcoming and inclusive as possible.
but I feel like a lot of people would argue it doesn't mean that.
>
> Unwelcome physical contact, including simulated physical
contact (eg, textual descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without
consent or after a request to stop
>
> last one is especially interesting because i doubt a lot of us
have seen it happen but it is one of those cases where we should trust
the marginalized communities that have it there as a rule instead of our
own privileged.
>
> I agree it's not explicitly called out, and in this case, I think
it's worth adding something.
Gnome has a nice section
Unwelcome physical contact. This includes touching a person without
permission, including sensitive areas such as their hair, pregnant
stomach, mobility device (wheelchair, scooter, etc) or tattoos. This
also includes physically blocking or intimidating another person.
Physical contact or simulated physical contact (such as emojis like
“kiss”) without affirmative consent is not acceptable. This includes
sharing or distribution of sexualized images or text.
MSavoritias
