Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of Conduct & Moderation for this list
Hi all -- On the OSGeo side of things, we put a bunch of work into creating a CoC (and related committee, private listserv, reporting structure, etc) a few years ago. The text of the CoC itself was based off of a variety of things from different online communities / tech groups / feminism groups / etc. CoC is here:: http://www.osgeo.org/code_of_conduct/ ... if you'd like more fodder for discussion. Happy to talk about any of this more if that's helpful; feel free to reach out. cheers - -kristin/k.bott portland, oregon, USA On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Selene Yangwrote: > After having a share of the results from the international gender > representation survey from Geochicas, we've come to a conclusion that at > least 7 out of 10 contributors believe in the need of implementing a CoC in > OSM in general, not only in specific lists. > > Sele. > > 2018-03-01 6:19 GMT-06:00 Ilya Zverev : > >> Hi, >> >> I'm a moderator on the Russian forum. A year ago I introduced CoC (called >> "rules", but technically it's CoC). I based these on several examples, like >> the Django one, translated and adapted to Russia. There was a huge backlash >> from some members, angry posts on the OSM diary appear to this day. But >> despite several reports to forum admins and to OSMF working groups, CoC >> still stands. >> >> Obviously at first it lead to some temporary bans, but with time there >> are zero users banned, and everyone is pretty polite and constructive. >> Which is a visible difference to how the forum was before me. The amount of >> discussions decreased, but the quality, in my opinion, rose. >> >> To me, there are two important conditions for CoC to succeed: cutting >> users slack (we have "one warning" policy + these expire after a time) and >> being strict in enforcing the CoC (banning multiple users at once if >> needed). >> >> So, I think to install CoC the moderator should just go and do it, and >> worry about technicalities later. If somebody does not like being in a >> space with CoC, they can choose any of the remaining hundred of mailing >> lists. >> >> Ilya >> >> > 1 марта 2018 г., в 15:04, Jo Walsh написал(а): >> > >> > Hi folks. I'm glad of this forum to reboot this discussion. >> > >> > From my POV the Code of Conduct is boilerplate and should include the >> minimum necessary in order to be both accepted and effective. For better or >> worse the absence of a CoC has become a signpost that an online community >> is not welcoming. >> > >> > When the CoC discussion blew up on the OSMF-talk list last year I tried >> to read the background and liked what I saw at: >> > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/ >> master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md >> > >> > It derives from the Go community, which lifted from Django and Rust, >> which were inspired by GeekFeminism efforts. The wording is pretty minimal >> and I like the initial emphasis on the positive. >> > >> >> We might even include something like "OpenStreetMap participation >> style" in >> >> that list so we do not have to tolerate disparaging remarks about >> remote >> >> mappers, craft mappers, newbie mappers or folks that participate >> through >> >> non-mapping contributions. >> > >> > Imo this would be walking into a minefield, encourage accusations of >> tone policing. The emphasis on having to spell out all kinds of >> unacceptable behaviour, as you note below, is to avoid a lot of contentious >> discussion about what is acceptable; it's the long discussion rather than >> any initial incident which will repel people or burn them out. >> > >> > I think contribution styles are not in scope here. OSM friends have >> wondered "why do we not include positive attributes that mappers should >> have, such as emphasis on surveying, no trespassing, etc" but an effort to >> get the wording right / get enough eyes and minds on the description of >> values, would just further delay the sensible adoption of a baseline CoC >> > >> >> How many endless discussions >> >> will there be (or have their been) about what is offensive as opposed >> to >> >> the somewhat easier to identify, disparaging or derogatory comment. >> > >> > Historically there has been a mailing list CoC but i dont think it had >> enough input to get adoption, it's narrow in scope and overly specific, it >> would be great if an effort here could trickle up into something OSMF as a >> whole could adopt >> > https://github.com/mvexel/CoC-mailing-lists/blob/master/code >> _of_conduct.md >> > >> > Lots more to discuss but i'll leave it here :D >> > >> > >> > Jo >> > >> > ___ >> > Diversity-talk mailing list >> > Code of Conduct: TBD >> > Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org >> > (_internal_name)s >> >> >> ___ >> Diversity-talk mailing list >> Code of Conduct: TBD >> Contact the mods (private):
Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of Conduct & Moderation for this list
Hi all, I have put the GF one as a draft on the OSM wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct Feel free to edit it as appropriate. At some point I'll go through and add the suggestions. On 28/02/18 15:27, Blake Girardot wrote: > From my perspective, and I am not sure why it is left out of > geekfeminism's policy is that item one under "Harassment includes" > should list "national origin, cultural affiliation" to address the > issue of people making offensive comments about people from > particular countries or cultures. Agreed. "national origin" has been included in anti-racism laws in the UK since the 1960s. > We might even include something like "OpenStreetMap participation > style" in that list so we do not have to tolerate disparaging remarks > about remote mappers, craft mappers, newbie mappers or folks that > participate through non-mapping contributions. Broadly in favour. Ilya Zverik said: > OpenStreetMap needs everything. More editors, more tutorials, more > > rendering styles, more mappers, more software. Anyone has something > to contribute, although most don’t know what to do. http://blog.opencagedata.com/post/openstreetmap-interview-ilya-zverev-level0 Is there a chance a broad wording could be interpreted as "Don't criticize reckless, bad faith, mapping *ever*"? 樂 I wouldn't want that. > And I would change or add to the first line "Offensive or > disparaging comments..." because "disparaging" or "derogatory" are > open to much less debate than the very subjective "offensive". How > many endless discussions will there be (or have their been) about > what is offensive as opposed to the somewhat easier to identify, > disparaging or derogatory comment. Agreed. "offensive" is vague and can be used against marginalized people (e.g. "LGBTQ rights are offensive my sincerely held religious beliefs"). Usually I use "harmful", but those work too. On 01/03/18 19:13, Paul Norman wrote: > A couple of issues I would consider if I were doing the selection > again are readability and education or socioeconomic status. Classism is a harmful thing, so I agree we should put that in. Better readability makes it easier for non-native English speakers. Rory ___ Diversity-talk mailing list Code of Conduct: TBD Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
Re: [Diversity-talk] Code of Conduct & Moderation for this list
On 2/28/2018 2:44 AM, Rory McCann wrote: Hi all, To follow up on the phone call, and waiting a little bit for people to join. I think this list should have a Code of Conduct. I propose something like Geek Feminism's one. Thoughts? http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Policy I see nothing wrong with a mailing list deciding on rules for how they moderate themselves. Before setting rules, it's important to identify what behavior is an issue. With OpenStreetMap Carto's (osm-carto) Code of Conduct, I wanted to start with text that covered derailing topics, including by taking issues off-topic. osm-carto went with a CoC based on that of Go.[1] The other codes of conduct that made my list for consideration were those from Debian, FreeBSD, Go, Joomla, Puppet, GNOME, Julia, and KDE. A downside to this list is that they're all software development related projects. OpenStreetMap Carto is similar to one[2], but OpenStreetMap isn't a software project. I would want to also consider what other non-software volunteer groups are doing. Some that kind to mine are cycling associations, ramblers, and other groups which OSM has a strong tie to. A couple of issues I would consider if I were doing the selection again are readability and education or socioeconomic status. Readability is a big problem with many codes of conduct. The Go CoC comes with a score of 11-13,[3] and I'd want 8-10 at most. This is better than the Geek Feminism one, which scores 13-15 and uses a lot of jargon. For education and socioeconomic status, I can't say it any better than Richard Fairhurst did [4]: Volunteer communities in general, and open source software in particular, can be unwelcoming places for people from poorer backgrounds or without a university/college education. Wealthy, educated people - which most open source contributors are - can easily dismiss contributions from such users through rhetorical skill, through sniping on grammar/spelling etc., and through belitting their concerns as not representative of the empowered, educated group. Increasingly I have noticed that contributors from these [areas where residents have typically benefited from as good an education, and have less well-paying jobs] find it hard to articulate their views on the site without being shot down by the wealthier, more educated majority. This might take the form of the majority criticising minority contributors over minutiae (small sincerely-believed factual inaccuracies, grammar/spelling); or a deliberate unwillingness to tolerate assumptions that differ from the majority; or constructing means of engagement/consultation that are less open to those from poorer backgrounds (evening meetings arranged which are effectively closed to those unable to get childcare, etc.). My open-source background is largely in the OpenStreetMap project where there has been a fair amount of academic research done into contributor biases (particularly, though not entirely, through the work of Professor Muki Haklay). The result of such bias is easy to visualise in OSM: wealthy areas such as London or San Francisco are mapped in much more detail than poorer areas such as the Welsh Valleys or the rural American Midwest. However, although the prevailing open-source narrative has led to a fair amount of (welcome) discussion as to how we can welcome and help those groups traditionally considered marginalised in technology, there has been little or no thought given to how we make ourselves more welcoming to poorer or less well educated people. Indeed, there are instances of where such contributors have received a hostile reception on the project's communication channels (mailing lists, on-site discussions). [1]: The reporting mechanisms weren't suitable for a small project [2]: It's style development, but we communicate over issues, pull requests, and similar means. [3]: Sometimes called grade level, but that leads people to bad assumptions about what level of education is needed to understand a piece of text [4]: https://github.com/ContributorCovenant/contributor_covenant/pull/491 ___ Diversity-talk mailing list Code of Conduct: TBD Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org (_internal_name)s