If you followed some of the other posts from yesterday, Anne posted a link to a very interesting page on common mistakes in CoC writing, including this specific issue: That an enumerated list of “don’ts” has legal issues. Which was one of my essential objections. That page also has a good example CoC that I think is great.
If you missed her email – here is the link https://www.codemag.com/article/1601021/Legal-Notes-Code-of-Conduct It is worth reading. It is short but bakes very clear and strong arguments about a better CoC. >From the intro para of that page: “ I believe codes of conduct for any event, whether it’s a software conference, convention, or sporting event, etc., is a good idea. At the same time, I don’t believe an event’s worthwhileness turns on the presence or absence of a code of conduct. If you’re going to implement a code of conduct, it needs to be reasonable, clear in its intent, and, above all, enforceable. In addition, before you decide to implement a code of conduct, you should be clear about the potential liability that can be incurred as a result of implementing such a code. “ In the section about enumerated lists: “First, there is a pattern of having enumerated lists to define entities. In the first paragraph, it was the list of persons covered. In this paragraph, it’s a list of protected traits. Whenever there are lists such as these, they become words of limitation, meaning that if something is not contained in the list and there was an opportunity to have a more inclusive list, there’s a strong argument that the omitted term was not meant to be covered.” He also speaks to the “actions”. Stating that some action WILL be taken is an issue, as not all reports should result in any action, much less drastic action. He suggests promising investigation, wit appropriate action to be taken. Again – here is the text of his suggestion – obviously this needs fleshing out for the “origami convention specifics” such as not disrupting class, not touching someone’s model without asking etc. But at it’s core it is along the lines of what I was suggesting – work from the assumption that we all KNOW what is civil vs uncivil behavior and just refer to that. We have to discuss this more on this end, but we are likely going to end up with something very closely based on the below. John P.S. Again – Thank you Anne. I had looked around but had not found anything like this. Who is covered? Anyone who is affiliated with this Conference (The “Participant”) is expected to conduct oneself in a civil manner and treat any other Participant with respect and civility. (The “Standard of Conduct”). A Participant includes, but is not limited to any Conference attendee, guest, sponsor, or staff. What is covered? The Standard of Conduct is defined by what is deemed to be generally accepted by the Conference; the conference location (the ”Venue”); the Venue’s own standards of conduct, rules and regulations; or any legal authority of which the Venue or Participant is subject. Any other conduct by a Participant that otherwise disrupts another Participant’s Conference experience shall be covered as well. How is this enforced? Only timely and directly reports of violations with sufficient factual details to the Conference can be investigated. Upon investigation, allegations may result in sanctions including, but not limited to expulsion from the Conference and Venue without recourse. Any report deemed to have not been made in good faith or with a reasonable factual basis shall be treated as a violation. Investigations and sanctions imposed shall be conducted and determined in the sole discretion of the Conference. Nothing in this Standard of Conduct interferes with or discourages a Participant from exercising his or her right to contact the Venue and/or law enforcement directly and in such a case; the Conference shall fully cooperate with the Venue and law enforcement. From: Origami <origami-boun...@lists.digitalorigami.com> On Behalf Of Carol Martinson Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 6:31 PM To: The Origami Mailing List <origami@lists.digitalorigami.com> Subject: Re: [Origami] CoC—Being Too Specific in Language Malachi, While that is worded differently than what the library had in the same category, to me it appears fine. Apparently the problem is my misunderstanding what we each meant by the words “exact” and “specific”. I apologize for misinterpreting your overall intent. Carol Martinson Sent from my iPad On May 17, 2021, at 1:02 PM, Malachi Brown <malac...@gmail.com <mailto:malac...@gmail.com> > wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:18 AM Carol Martinson via Origami <origami@lists.digitalorigami.com <mailto:origami@lists.digitalorigami.com> > wrote: If I am interpreting what he is trying to say correctly, people need the specific words and actions named so they know what is and is not allowed. Acceptable behaviors vary widely from culture to culture so they may need specific actions listed to know what is expected. I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say or I am misunderstanding what you are trying to say. I think, at least for an event CoC, there is a balance that can be struck between the very vague and open to interpretation "don't be a jerk" and the overly specific enumeration of all words and actions that qualify as harassment. I specifically referenced the OUSA CoC because it does enumerate several types of discrimination that are specifically prohibited which gives the person reading it an understanding of what is not acceptable. I don't think specific words or actions need to be spelled out, but that it is useful to know what areas are covered by the policy. So, maybe we can clarify this point. From the OUSA CoC, do you consider the following to be overly specific? * offensive communication related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, and age. * use of sexist, racist, ableist, or any other discriminatory or exclusionary language. thanks, malachi
