Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Stefano Maffulli]

Hello Kurt, all,

On 03/07/2014 01:56 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
> There have been a variety of instances where community members have
> expressed their ideas and concerns via email or at a summit, or simply
> submitted a patch that perhaps challenges someone’s opinion of The Right
> Way to Do It, and responses to that person have been far less
> constructive than they could have been[1]. 

I apologize if I have failed to identify personal attacks on places
(real and virtual) that the community management team at OpenStack
oversees.

If you or any member of the community feels like they're being
mistreated please contact me or Tom immediately because we're here to help.

It's probably worth reminding that there are over 2,000 known
committers, over 400 active monthly, over 400 comments added *per hour*
on gerrit (even excluding the bots, that's a huge number of chances to
offend someone): we're way beyond the size where two people can monitor
everything. We need people to highlight trouble to us.

You should contact us because if we don't see what may be wrong
behaviour and we don't see the trends, we can't fix it.

> What if every time someone shared an idea, they could do so without fear
> of backlash and bullying? 

Bullying is a serious word and carries a precise meaning. Please contact
me offlist and share the exact details of the incidents you have in mind
so that we can investigate and decide how to address it.

> How can we build on what is already working, and make the bad
> experiences as rare as possible?

My impression is that in general we have open minds and OpenStack is
very welcoming to new ideas. Given the size of the community and its
growth rate, we have started initiatives to help newcomers understand
the values of OpenStack community and its way of doing things.

The first is a message that welcomes new contributors: since a couple of
days any developer who pushes up for review the first patch is greeted
with an email explaning what's going to happen, how to interact with
others, how to deal with negative votes... Tom wrote the script and
merged on our gerrit system https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80111/

The second initiative is a training program aimed to teach new
contributors how to collaborate and get features, patches, approved more
effectively. The first instance of this training in Atlanta sold out in
a few hours, meaning that there is huge demand for it. I'm thinking of
ways to scale it up.

All in all, I have the impression that the community has very solid
values, is for the most part welcoming and accepting challenges. I am
aware of few corner cases that are bad enough to request special
handling but I have no evidence to think this friction is widespread. I
may be wrong: please, you and anyone, help me understand the size of the
problems you're reporting.

Maybe we need to establish some form of 'advocate' role to help
arbitrate/negotiate the cases of friction? A place where people can
immediately report to if they feel mistreated? What do you think?


> A few ideas to seed the discussion:
> 
>   * Identify a set of core values that the community already embraces
> for the most part, and put them down “on paper.”[3] Leaders can keep
> these values fresh in everyone’s minds by (1) leading by example,
> and (2) referring to them regularly in conversations and talks.

I think we have values written down on
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Open but the already cited growth rate
makes them hard to spread across the board. Upstream Training is meant
to address the growth problem and spread the knowledge of core values.

>   * PTLs can add mentoring skills and a mindset of "seeking first to
> understand” to their list of criteria for evaluating proposals to
> add a community member to a core team.

are core team members not trying to understand now? What is preventing
them to be more mindful? How can we help them?

>   * Get people together in person, early and often. Mid-cycle meetups
> and mini-summits provide much higher-resolution communication
> channels than email and IRC, and are great ways to clear up
> misunderstandings, build relationships of trust, and generally get
> everyone pulling in the same direction.

I think among open source projects we probably have the most organized
set of user groups around the world. We have OpenStack Ambassadors
around the world
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Community/AmbassadorProgram... I think
we have a lot of chances already to meet in person and clear the air
from misunderstandings. How can we improve this wealth of tools we have?

Cheers,
Stef


-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Solly Ross]

Since I joined the OpenStack community back in May, this is something I've 
though about.

I think there's something to be said for thought-to-text being a lossy encoding 
algorithm (at least
the way most people use it).  I've encountered cases where it appeared the 
person on the other end was angry or
belittling, where in fact they were just surprised (or perhaps were slightly 
exasperated).

Sometimes it's seemed like I've had reviews where the first comment feels like
"OMG THIS IS THE WORST THING IMAGINABLE YOU SHOULD GO DIE IN A FIRE" and then I 
make a change and the next comment
is "you're an awesome person and should feel proud of yourself".

To a certain extent, things like emoji can help to rectify situations like 
these (that's actually why people started using
them back in the BBS days), but part of it is simply knowing that certain 
people talk a certain way.  Could some people
be more conscious of how their words could be interpreted?  Certainly, but it's 
difficult to know how one's words will
be interpreted.  Are there cases of people actually intending to be a dick?  
Probably, but I feel like these cases are
dwarfed by the aforementioned cases.

Just my 0.3 BTC.

Best Regards,
Solly Ross

- Original Message -
From: "Chris Behrens" 
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 

Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:25:08 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations


On Mar 18, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Matt Riedemann < mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com > 
wrote: 




[…] 
Not to detract from what you're saying, but this is 'meh' to me. My company has 
some different kind of values thing every 6 months it seems and maybe it's just 
me but I never really pay attention to any of it. I think I have to put 
something on my annual goals/results about it, but it's just fluffy wording. 

To me this is a self-policing community, if someone is being a dick, the others 
should call them on it, or the PTL for the project should stand up against it 
and set the tone for the community and culture his project wants to have. 
That's been my experience at least. 

Maybe some people would find codifying this helpful, but there are already lots 
of wikis and things that people can't remember on a daily basis so adding 
another isn't probably going to help the problem. Bully's don't tend to care 
about codes, but if people stand up against them in public they should be 
outcast. 

I agree with the goals and sentiment of Kurt’s message. But, just to add a 
little to Matt’s reply: Let’s face it. Everyone has a bad day now and then. 
It’s easier for some people to lose their cool over others. Nothing’s going to 
change that. 

- Chris 


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Chris Behrens]

On Mar 18, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Matt Riedemann  wrote:

> […]
> Not to detract from what you're saying, but this is 'meh' to me. My company 
> has some different kind of values thing every 6 months it seems and maybe 
> it's just me but I never really pay attention to any of it.  I think I have 
> to put something on my annual goals/results about it, but it's just fluffy 
> wording.
> 
> To me this is a self-policing community, if someone is being a dick, the 
> others should call them on it, or the PTL for the project should stand up 
> against it and set the tone for the community and culture his project wants 
> to have.  That's been my experience at least.
> 
> Maybe some people would find codifying this helpful, but there are already 
> lots of wikis and things that people can't remember on a daily basis so 
> adding another isn't probably going to help the problem. Bully's don't tend 
> to care about codes, but if people stand up against them in public they 
> should be outcast.

I agree with the goals and sentiment of Kurt’s message. But, just to add a 
little to Matt’s reply: Let’s face it. Everyone has a bad day now and then. 
It’s easier for some people to lose their cool over others. Nothing’s going to 
change that.

- Chris

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Matt Riedemann]

On 3/7/2014 1:56 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:

Folks,

I’m sure that I’m not the first person to bring this up, but I’d like to
get everyone’s thoughts on what concrete actions we, as a community, can
take to improve the status quo.

There have been a variety of instances where community members have
expressed their ideas and concerns via email or at a summit, or simply
submitted a patch that perhaps challenges someone’s opinion of The Right
Way to Do It, and responses to that person have been far less
constructive than they could have been[1]. In an open community, I don’t
expect every person who comments on a ML post or a patch to be
congenial, but I do expect community leaders to lead by example when it
comes to creating an environment where every person’s voice is valued
and respected.

What if every time someone shared an idea, they could do so without fear
of backlash and bullying? What if people could raise their concerns
without being summarily dismissed? What if “seeking first to
understand”[2] were a core value in our culture? It would not only
accelerate our pace of innovation, but also help us better understand
the needs of our cloud users, helping ensure we aren’t just building
OpenStack in the right way, but also building /the right OpenStack/.

We need open minds to build an open cloud.

Many times, we /do/ have wonderful, constructive discussions, but the
times we don’t cause wounds in the community that take a long time to
heal. Psychologists tell us that it takes a lot of good experiences to
make up for one bad one. I will be the first to admit I’m not perfect.
Communication is hard. But I’m convinced we can do better. We /must/ do
better.

How can we build on what is already working, and make the bad
experiences as rare as possible?

A few ideas to seed the discussion:

  * Identify a set of core values that the community already embraces
for the most part, and put them down “on paper.”[3] Leaders can keep
these values fresh in everyone’s minds by (1) leading by example,
and (2) referring to them regularly in conversations and talks.
  * PTLs can add mentoring skills and a mindset of "seeking first to
understand” to their list of criteria for evaluating proposals to
add a community member to a core team.
  * Get people together in person, early and often. Mid-cycle meetups
and mini-summits provide much higher-resolution communication
channels than email and IRC, and are great ways to clear up
misunderstandings, build relationships of trust, and generally get
everyone pulling in the same direction.

What else can we do?

Kurt

[1] There are plenty of examples, going back years. Anyone who has been
in the community very long will be able to recall some to mind. Recent
ones I thought of include Barbican’s initial request for incubation on
the ML, dismissive and disrespectful exchanges in some of the design
sessions in Hong Kong (bordering on personal attacks), and the
occasional “WTF?! This is the dumbest idea ever!” patch comment.
[2] https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit5.php
[3] We already have a code of conduct
 but I think
a list of core values would be easier to remember and allude to in
day-to-day discussions. I’m trying to think of ways to make this idea
practical. We need to stand up for our values, not just /say/ we have them.


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



Not to detract from what you're saying, but this is 'meh' to me. My 
company has some different kind of values thing every 6 months it seems 
and maybe it's just me but I never really pay attention to any of it.  I 
think I have to put something on my annual goals/results about it, but 
it's just fluffy wording.


To me this is a self-policing community, if someone is being a dick, the 
others should call them on it, or the PTL for the project should stand 
up against it and set the tone for the community and culture his project 
wants to have.  That's been my experience at least.


Maybe some people would find codifying this helpful, but there are 
already lots of wikis and things that people can't remember on a daily 
basis so adding another isn't probably going to help the problem. 
Bully's don't tend to care about codes, but if people stand up against 
them in public they should be outcast.


--

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Renat Akhmerov]

100% support that.

Renat Akhmerov
@ Mirantis Inc.



On 18 Mar 2014, at 02:00, Adrian Otto  wrote:

> Kurt,
> 
> I think that a set of community values for OpenStack would be a terrific 
> asset. I refer to values constantly as a way to align my efforts with the 
> needs of my company. I'd love to have the same tools for my contributions to 
> community efforts as well.
> 
> Adrian
> 
> On Mar 7, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Kurt Griffiths  
> wrote:
> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> I’m sure that I’m not the first person to bring this up, but I’d like to get 
>> everyone’s thoughts on what concrete actions we, as a community, can take to 
>> improve the status quo.
>> 
>> There have been a variety of instances where community members have 
>> expressed their ideas and concerns via email or at a summit, or simply 
>> submitted a patch that perhaps challenges someone’s opinion of The Right Way 
>> to Do It, and responses to that person have been far less constructive than 
>> they could have been[1]. In an open community, I don’t expect every person 
>> who comments on a ML post or a patch to be congenial, but I do expect 
>> community leaders to lead by example when it comes to creating an 
>> environment where every person’s voice is valued and respected.
>> 
>> What if every time someone shared an idea, they could do so without fear of 
>> backlash and bullying? What if people could raise their concerns without 
>> being summarily dismissed? What if “seeking first to understand”[2] were a 
>> core value in our culture? It would not only accelerate our pace of 
>> innovation, but also help us better understand the needs of our cloud users, 
>> helping ensure we aren’t just building OpenStack in the right way, but also 
>> building the right OpenStack.
>> 
>> We need open minds to build an open cloud.
>> 
>> Many times, we do have wonderful, constructive discussions, but the times we 
>> don’t cause wounds in the community that take a long time to heal. 
>> Psychologists tell us that it takes a lot of good experiences to make up for 
>> one bad one. I will be the first to admit I’m not perfect. Communication is 
>> hard. But I’m convinced we can do better. We must do better.
>> 
>> How can we build on what is already working, and make the bad experiences as 
>> rare as possible?
>> 
>> A few ideas to seed the discussion:
>> Identify a set of core values that the community already embraces for the 
>> most part, and put them down “on paper.”[3] Leaders can keep these values 
>> fresh in everyone’s minds by (1) leading by example, and (2) referring to 
>> them regularly in conversations and talks.
>> PTLs can add mentoring skills and a mindset of "seeking first to understand” 
>> to their list of criteria for evaluating proposals to add a community member 
>> to a core team.
>> Get people together in person, early and often. Mid-cycle meetups and 
>> mini-summits provide much higher-resolution communication channels than 
>> email and IRC, and are great ways to clear up misunderstandings, build 
>> relationships of trust, and generally get everyone pulling in the same 
>> direction.
>> What else can we do?
>> 
>> Kurt
>> 
>> [1] There are plenty of examples, going back years. Anyone who has been in 
>> the community very long will be able to recall some to mind. Recent ones I 
>> thought of include Barbican’s initial request for incubation on the ML, 
>> dismissive and disrespectful exchanges in some of the design sessions in 
>> Hong Kong (bordering on personal attacks), and the occasional “WTF?! This is 
>> the dumbest idea ever!” patch comment.
>> [2] https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit5.php
>> [3] We already have a code of conduct but I think a list of core values 
>> would be easier to remember and allude to in day-to-day discussions. I’m 
>> trying to think of ways to make this idea practical. We need to stand up for 
>> our values, not just say we have them.
>> ___
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> ___
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Adrian Otto]

Kurt,

I think that a set of community values for OpenStack would be a terrific asset. 
I refer to values constantly as a way to align my efforts with the needs of my 
company. I'd love to have the same tools for my contributions to community 
efforts as well.

Adrian

On Mar 7, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Kurt Griffiths 
mailto:kurt.griffi...@rackspace.com>> wrote:

Folks,

I’m sure that I’m not the first person to bring this up, but I’d like to get 
everyone’s thoughts on what concrete actions we, as a community, can take to 
improve the status quo.

There have been a variety of instances where community members have expressed 
their ideas and concerns via email or at a summit, or simply submitted a patch 
that perhaps challenges someone’s opinion of The Right Way to Do It, and 
responses to that person have been far less constructive than they could have 
been[1]. In an open community, I don’t expect every person who comments on a ML 
post or a patch to be congenial, but I do expect community leaders to lead by 
example when it comes to creating an environment where every person’s voice is 
valued and respected.

What if every time someone shared an idea, they could do so without fear of 
backlash and bullying? What if people could raise their concerns without being 
summarily dismissed? What if “seeking first to understand”[2] were a core value 
in our culture? It would not only accelerate our pace of innovation, but also 
help us better understand the needs of our cloud users, helping ensure we 
aren’t just building OpenStack in the right way, but also building the right 
OpenStack.

We need open minds to build an open cloud.

Many times, we do have wonderful, constructive discussions, but the times we 
don’t cause wounds in the community that take a long time to heal. 
Psychologists tell us that it takes a lot of good experiences to make up for 
one bad one. I will be the first to admit I’m not perfect. Communication is 
hard. But I’m convinced we can do better. We must do better.

How can we build on what is already working, and make the bad experiences as 
rare as possible?

A few ideas to seed the discussion:

  *   Identify a set of core values that the community already embraces for the 
most part, and put them down “on paper.”[3] Leaders can keep these values fresh 
in everyone’s minds by (1) leading by example, and (2) referring to them 
regularly in conversations and talks.
  *   PTLs can add mentoring skills and a mindset of "seeking first to 
understand” to their list of criteria for evaluating proposals to add a 
community member to a core team.
  *   Get people together in person, early and often. Mid-cycle meetups and 
mini-summits provide much higher-resolution communication channels than email 
and IRC, and are great ways to clear up misunderstandings, build relationships 
of trust, and generally get everyone pulling in the same direction.

What else can we do?

Kurt

[1] There are plenty of examples, going back years. Anyone who has been in the 
community very long will be able to recall some to mind. Recent ones I thought 
of include Barbican’s initial request for incubation on the ML, dismissive and 
disrespectful exchanges in some of the design sessions in Hong Kong (bordering 
on personal attacks), and the occasional “WTF?! This is the dumbest idea ever!” 
patch comment.
[2] https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit5.php
[3] We already have a code of 
conduct but I think 
a list of core values would be easier to remember and allude to in day-to-day 
discussions. I’m trying to think of ways to make this idea practical. We need 
to stand up for our values, not just say we have them.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] Constructive Conversations

[Kurt Griffiths]

Folks,

I’m sure that I’m not the first person to bring this up, but I’d like to get 
everyone’s thoughts on what concrete actions we, as a community, can take to 
improve the status quo.

There have been a variety of instances where community members have expressed 
their ideas and concerns via email or at a summit, or simply submitted a patch 
that perhaps challenges someone’s opinion of The Right Way to Do It, and 
responses to that person have been far less constructive than they could have 
been[1]. In an open community, I don’t expect every person who comments on a ML 
post or a patch to be congenial, but I do expect community leaders to lead by 
example when it comes to creating an environment where every person’s voice is 
valued and respected.

What if every time someone shared an idea, they could do so without fear of 
backlash and bullying? What if people could raise their concerns without being 
summarily dismissed? What if “seeking first to understand”[2] were a core value 
in our culture? It would not only accelerate our pace of innovation, but also 
help us better understand the needs of our cloud users, helping ensure we 
aren’t just building OpenStack in the right way, but also building the right 
OpenStack.

We need open minds to build an open cloud.

Many times, we do have wonderful, constructive discussions, but the times we 
don’t cause wounds in the community that take a long time to heal. 
Psychologists tell us that it takes a lot of good experiences to make up for 
one bad one. I will be the first to admit I’m not perfect. Communication is 
hard. But I’m convinced we can do better. We must do better.

How can we build on what is already working, and make the bad experiences as 
rare as possible?

A few ideas to seed the discussion:

  *   Identify a set of core values that the community already embraces for the 
most part, and put them down “on paper.”[3] Leaders can keep these values fresh 
in everyone’s minds by (1) leading by example, and (2) referring to them 
regularly in conversations and talks.
  *   PTLs can add mentoring skills and a mindset of "seeking first to 
understand” to their list of criteria for evaluating proposals to add a 
community member to a core team.
  *   Get people together in person, early and often. Mid-cycle meetups and 
mini-summits provide much higher-resolution communication channels than email 
and IRC, and are great ways to clear up misunderstandings, build relationships 
of trust, and generally get everyone pulling in the same direction.

What else can we do?

Kurt

[1] There are plenty of examples, going back years. Anyone who has been in the 
community very long will be able to recall some to mind. Recent ones I thought 
of include Barbican’s initial request for incubation on the ML, dismissive and 
disrespectful exchanges in some of the design sessions in Hong Kong (bordering 
on personal attacks), and the occasional “WTF?! This is the dumbest idea ever!” 
patch comment.
[2] https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit5.php
[3] We already have a code of 
conduct but I think 
a list of core values would be easier to remember and allude to in day-to-day 
discussions. I’m trying to think of ways to make this idea practical. We need 
to stand up for our values, not just say we have them.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev