On 01/22/2016 03:31 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 22, 2016, at 3:15 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgri...@gmail.com> wrote:
I do wonder what it is that made you terrified of a shitstorm, and
what it is that you're hoping for that you don't feel is already
present.
Regina linked to some shitstorms in the Opal and Ruby communities. Shitstorms
are not unusual when people ask for a CoC.
Not only do I want that, but I thought we had it. I have still not
seen anything to show me otherwise; the hypothetical examples I can
remember seeing on these recent threads bear no resemblance to
anything I can remember ever seeing on the PostgreSQL lists. Can
you point to something as an example of the kind of behavior that
you think a Code of Conduct would have prevented?
My own behavior earlier is not a terrible example. By one point on the CoC (“
language and actions are free
of personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks”), it seems problematic if
not an outright violation. But one can argue by another point (“tolerant of
people’s right to have opposing views”) that it’s totally within bounds. So the
demarcations of right and wrong are too easily subject to debate and further
disagreement. Less ambiguity and contradiction is required.
Regarding the question of the Code of Conduct having short, general
statements versus listing "protected groups", etc. -- I would like
to see everyone protected. Any list, by its nature, is going to
make someone feel excluded and unprotected. In my view, the closer
it is to a statement of "The Golden Rule"[1], the better.
Some of us do not need protection; we are already privileged members of the
community. Therefor it’s important to spell out whom we aim to protect.
The above is exactly where I figured this was going to go, loaded
buzzwords, in this case privilege. The fact that it is a buzzword is not
of consequence, the fact that it is profiling is. Basically it says we
can look at the color of someone's skin and along with their sex
determine where to slot them, without reference to what they actually
think or their life experiences. Now if you want to claim privilege for
yourself fine, but making a generic statement of privilege is offensive
to me.
In particular, I think that if (hypothetically) someone who is part
of the community makes some idiotic, offensive, insensitive
statement of blathering idiocy *outside PostgreSQL forums*, they
should enjoy the same right to respect and prevention of attack *on
the PostgreSQL forums* as everyone else.
What if they psychologically abused someone in person, perhaps another member
of the community, but in a non-community context? Should there be no
repercussions?
They just better not
repeat the idiocy here. I would hope that major contributors would
keep in mind the impact that such statements in other venues might
have on the public perception of the community. I've come around
to the point of view that encouraging such consideration is outside
the scope of what a Code of Conduct should formally address.
In my above example, the victim of the abuse would not feel safe in our
community, because their abuser would still be a member in good standing. Even
if they reported that behavior, the would have no expectation of anything being
done to address it. In this example, the abuser ends up protected by the CoC
while the victim is not.
This is a very real thing that happens to real people in communities every day.
IME, we want people to feel safe reporting incidents even if they occur outside
the community, and that such reports will be taken seriously, with an explicit
policy for doing so.
The PostgreSQL forums should be a safe place, and rancor engendered
elsewhere should not be brought in. Problems should be resolved in
a way that minimizes the chance of escalation, recognizing that
there could be miscommunication.[2]
Rancor isn’t the problem as much as abuse. And most abuse you can’t see unless
the targets of such abuse feel safe reporting them.
Limiting the policy to community forums is insufficient for making people feel
safe. This is the whole reason for v1.3.0 of the Contributor Covenant:
https://github.com/CoralineAda/contributor_covenant/blob/master/changelog#L7
Best,
David
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@aklaver.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
