Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[James Heilman]

Yes common sense, one would hope, would generally suffices. But when common
sense is questioned it is also nice to have something more concrete to
point to.

James

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I quite like the Phabricator guidelines. Can't those just be replicated to
> apply to all technical spaces? No more years of debate needed, or new
> arbcoms, or strange statements of principles, or exhaustive lists of
> inappropriate behaviour.
>
> Adrian Raddatz
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > P
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Chris Koerner
> > Sent: Monday, 21 November 2016 5:52 PM
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of
> > Conduct (TCC)
> >
> > I'm speaking as a volunteer, not as WMF staff, if that matters to you.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> > > It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions
> > > within technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is
> > > already followed, so just codify it and call it a guideline or a
> > > generally accepted
> > document.
> > > I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
> > > expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty.
> >
> > That's what a Code of Conduct is. :)
> >
> > It would be wonderful if it were as easy as you describe, but it hasn't
> > proven to be.
> >
> > It's taking longer because the WMF/Board did not initially take the
> > approach of applying this 'top-down' style to the technical spaces.Those
> of
> > us who have been involved (some, like myself before we became staff) want
> > to do it with community involvement and with thoughtful discussion. Are
> we
> > going to get it right the first time around? No, maybe not. Are we trying
> > to design something with thoughtfulness and flexibility? Yes.
> >
> > MZMcBride wrote:
> > > And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you
> > > could argue that a technical code of conduct is needed.
> >
> > One could also argue that a disregard for common sense is exactly what
> > permits individuals to violate our shared expectations of community
> > behavior.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Chris Koerner
> > clkoerner.com
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > -
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13447 - Release Date:
> 11/21/16
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Adrian Raddatz]

I quite like the Phabricator guidelines. Can't those just be replicated to
apply to all technical spaces? No more years of debate needed, or new
arbcoms, or strange statements of principles, or exhaustive lists of
inappropriate behaviour.

Adrian Raddatz

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> +1
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Chris Koerner
> Sent: Monday, 21 November 2016 5:52 PM
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of
> Conduct (TCC)
>
> I'm speaking as a volunteer, not as WMF staff, if that matters to you.
>
> Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> > It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions
> > within technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is
> > already followed, so just codify it and call it a guideline or a
> > generally accepted
> document.
> > I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
> > expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty.
>
> That's what a Code of Conduct is. :)
>
> It would be wonderful if it were as easy as you describe, but it hasn't
> proven to be.
>
> It's taking longer because the WMF/Board did not initially take the
> approach of applying this 'top-down' style to the technical spaces.Those of
> us who have been involved (some, like myself before we became staff) want
> to do it with community involvement and with thoughtful discussion. Are we
> going to get it right the first time around? No, maybe not. Are we trying
> to design something with thoughtfulness and flexibility? Yes.
>
> MZMcBride wrote:
> > And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you
> > could argue that a technical code of conduct is needed.
>
> One could also argue that a disregard for common sense is exactly what
> permits individuals to violate our shared expectations of community
> behavior.
>
> Yours,
> Chris Koerner
> clkoerner.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13447 - Release Date: 11/21/16
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Peter Southwood]

+1
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Chris Koerner
Sent: Monday, 21 November 2016 5:52 PM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct 
(TCC)

I'm speaking as a volunteer, not as WMF staff, if that matters to you.

Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions 
> within technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is 
> already followed, so just codify it and call it a guideline or a 
> generally accepted
document.
> I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our 
> expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty.

That's what a Code of Conduct is. :)

It would be wonderful if it were as easy as you describe, but it hasn't proven 
to be.

It's taking longer because the WMF/Board did not initially take the approach of 
applying this 'top-down' style to the technical spaces.Those of us who have 
been involved (some, like myself before we became staff) want to do it with 
community involvement and with thoughtful discussion. Are we going to get it 
right the first time around? No, maybe not. Are we trying to design something 
with thoughtfulness and flexibility? Yes.

MZMcBride wrote:
> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you 
> could argue that a technical code of conduct is needed.

One could also argue that a disregard for common sense is exactly what permits 
individuals to violate our shared expectations of community behavior.

Yours,
Chris Koerner
clkoerner.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13447 - Release Date: 11/21/16


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[rupert THURNER]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:47 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
> argue that a technical code of conduct is needed. When you consider the
> actual context, however, it becomes pretty clear that this is unnecessary
> bureaucracy. The repeated concerns about outsized influence by
> Wikimedia Foundation employees have largely gone ignored.
>
i think so too. common sense replaces a lot of rules and policies :) donors
money is imo better invested in writing good software supporting the
mission than making policies. we have enough policies and rules of all
kind, being a burden when contriuting, especially to newbies. i get a
chicken skin of fright when i read the collaboration teams plans of putting
bureaucracy into software, talking about "the largest wikis have the most
complex workflows". the most complex and stable workflow i know is in
wikinews, and we all know that wikinews died. i would really love if
"collaboration" would be the main topic, not "process" and "rule". this is
just so against the basic "wiki" idea, our core value.

best
rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Chris Koerner]

I'm speaking as a volunteer, not as WMF staff, if that matters to you.

Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions within
> technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is already followed,
> so just codify it and call it a guideline or a generally accepted
document.
> I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
> expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty.

That's what a Code of Conduct is. :)

It would be wonderful if it were as easy as you describe, but it hasn't
proven to be.

It's taking longer because the WMF/Board did not initially take the
approach of applying this 'top-down' style to the technical spaces.Those of
us who have been involved (some, like myself before we became staff) want
to do it with community involvement and with thoughtful discussion. Are we
going to get it right the first time around? No, maybe not. Are we trying
to design something with thoughtfulness and flexibility? Yes.

MZMcBride wrote:
> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
> argue that a technical code of conduct is needed.

One could also argue that a disregard for common sense is exactly what
permits individuals to violate our shared expectations of community
behavior.

Yours,
Chris Koerner
clkoerner.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[MZMcBride]

Legoktm wrote:
>On 11/21/2016 01:36 AM, Adrian Raddatz wrote:
>> So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone
>>comments on a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we
>>unable to act currently because there's no code of conduct so how could
>>they have known otherwise?
>
>The current guideline is
>.
>It only applies to Phabricator, not all technical spaces, like the
>proposed COC.

If we disregard these pages:

* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct_policy
* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use
* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy

And the many others listed at these places:
* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct
* https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Draft#See_also

And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
argue that a technical code of conduct is needed. When you consider the
actual context, however, it becomes pretty clear that this is unnecessary
bureaucracy. The repeated concerns about outsized influence by
Wikimedia Foundation employees have largely gone ignored.

Quim Gil wrote:
>The discussion about this CoC is no exception, and we have seen WMF
>employees with different opinions and votes at almost every point.

If we discount discussions like "Finalize introduction to "Committee"
section?" on the talk page, I suppose:
.
It's plain to see in discussions like this that every support vote came
from Wikimedia Foundation employees or employees of another Wikimedia
affiliate (WMDE and WMFR). The opposing votes came from volunteers, but
three of the four were struck as being too late.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Quim Gil]

Hi there,

A bit of context is needed in this discussion about the Code of Conduct for
Wikimedia technical spaces
.

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> A substantial proportion of the comments on the talk page (and the
> archives) are from WMF employees, not community members.


The dichotomy WMF employees vs community members is false in Wikimedia
technical spaces (and probably beyond, but I'll keep the scope in Wikimedia
tech here). Even the roles of WMF employee / volunteer are quite mixed,
since the WMF has been hiring prolific technical volunteers during years.

While having WMF usernames administrating or simply editing articles in
i.e. English Wikipedia would be basically unthinkable, in Wikimedia
technical spaces is sometimes a norm, sometimes a requirement. Look at the
admin groups of MediaWiki.org, wikitech.wikimedia.org, Phabricator, Gerrit,
many technical mailing lists and IRC channels. Look also at the maintainers
of many software projects and Phabricator projects. look as well in the
list of people who contribute code, bug reports, and other types of
technical contributions.


> I realize, Matt,
> that you have been attempting to recruit broader participation, but it
> looks like the results have been less than one would have hoped.
>

The discussion of the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces
 (which happens
in MediaWiki.org, not Phabricator) is probably the process that has been
more widely and continuously advertised in Wikimedia technical spaces. It
is a good example of a tough and quite exhausting long-term discussion that
is likely to drive away many people.

The saddest paradox is that such discussion dynamics work against the main
beneficiaries of the CoC: newcomers, minority groups, and other people with
weaker defenses against harassment and disrespect. If you look at the
participants regularly active in the discussion, you will find that the big
majority (regardless affiliation, myself included) fit in a quite narrow
and homogeneous profile in terms of gender, academic level, English
proficiency, discussion style, color and thickness of skin, stubbornness...

Given WMF's history of clashing with the community about subjects such as
> Superprotect, VisualEditor, and ACTRIAL


Can you provide examples of such WMF vs volunteers clashes in Wikimedia
technical spaces?

The toughest and most polarized discussions that I recall had WMF and
volunteers in both sides. In fact, it is not uncommon to see opposition to
"a WMF move" coming from WMF members, in their volunteer or professional
roles.

The discussion about this CoC is no exception, and we have seen WMF
employees with different opinions and votes at almost every point.

it seems to me that while WMF
> participation in discussions such as this is good, the high proportion of
> WMF representation on the talk page makes the resulting document more
> likely to reflect the view of WMF and its employees rather than the larger
> community.


Can you specify where in the draft do you see "the view of WMF and its
employees rather than the larger
community"?

We have been discussing this draft for more than a year now, and almost
every sentence has been reviewed and discussed. My main concern (inspired
by other promoters of this Code) has been to reflect the view and the
interests of the potential beneficiaries of the CoC. In fact, many of the
toughest and longest discussions were not centered around the interests of
these existing and potential community members at all.


A bit more context to address other replies to this thread:

Action against harassment and disrespect is already taken in Wikimedia
technical spaces, partly thanks to a social pressure that (I dare to say)
is less tolerant to such disruptions than many Wikimedia communities,
partly thanks to the many admins/maintainers in many different spaces, each
of them with different tools to address harassment. A subset of the
Technical Communication team

handles the reports that we receive, and recently we started publishing a
metric of cases handled in the Community Engagement quarterly reviews

.

All this is happening thanks to the initiative of many individuals with
different affiliations (for instance, those who participated in the writing
of the Bugzilla (now Phabricator) etiquette
).
However, it is happening in a quite ad hoc way (i.e. nobody decided that
the Technical Collaboration team would handle harassment reports, we just
kept receiving them and decided to do something about them).

The Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces should provide a common
framework for all the different 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Legoktm]

Hi,

On 11/21/2016 01:36 AM, Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone comments on
> a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we unable to act
> currently because there's no code of conduct so how could they have known
> otherwise?

The current guideline is
.
It only applies to Phabricator, not all technical spaces, like the
proposed COC.

-- Legoktm

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Fæ]

WMF staff turning into unelected IRC police, with the power to globally ban
volunteers with no appeal process, and no transparency, is not 'legit'. It
abandons respect for community consensus.

WMF police will be divisive, not a real plan to tackle harassment.

Fae

On 21 Nov 2016 09:29, "Vi to"  wrote:

> I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
> enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :
>
> > Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> > methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> > worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> > rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help
> us
> > finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to
> harass
> > someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> > ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> > indefinitely.
> >
> > The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> > deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> > using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict
> account-->
> > operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> > creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> > enforced
> > > across our projects.
> > >
> > > Adrian Raddatz
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Same here, ofc.
> > >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities
> refusing
> > >> these very basic principles.
> > >>
> > >> Vito
> > >>
> > >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> > >>
> > >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> > >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> > >> murder
> > >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> > maybe,
> > >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC
> channels
> > >> in
> > >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> > >> ones).
> > >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> > that.
> > >> > ___
> > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > >> >  unsubscribe>
> > >> >
> > >> ___
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Adrian Raddatz]

So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone comments on
a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we unable to act
currently because there's no code of conduct so how could they have known
otherwise?

It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions within
technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is already followed,
so just codify it and call it a guideline or a generally accepted document.
I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty. Instead,
it has been months (years?) of debate over wording and enforcement, when
there has been no demonstrated deficiency in how we currently deal with it.
Except of course the technical limitations, which they could have been
spending this time/money on fixing.

Also, I think I misread your first comment. I'm sorry for referencing it in
my comment then; I wasn't trying to "mould" your opinion to support my own.

Adrian Raddatz

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Vi to  wrote:

> I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
> enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :
>
> > Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> > methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> > worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> > rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help
> us
> > finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to
> harass
> > someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> > ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> > indefinitely.
> >
> > The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> > deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> > using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict
> account-->
> > operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> > creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> > enforced
> > > across our projects.
> > >
> > > Adrian Raddatz
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Same here, ofc.
> > >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities
> refusing
> > >> these very basic principles.
> > >>
> > >> Vito
> > >>
> > >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> > >>
> > >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> > >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> > >> murder
> > >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> > maybe,
> > >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC
> channels
> > >> in
> > >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> > >> ones).
> > >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> > that.
> > >> > ___
> > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > >> >  unsubscribe>
> > >> >
> > >> ___
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Vi to]

I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.

Vito

2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :

> Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help us
> finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to harass
> someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> indefinitely.
>
> The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict account-->
> operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
>
> Adrian Raddatz
>
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> wrote:
>
> > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> enforced
> > across our projects.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> >
> >> Same here, ofc.
> >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities refusing
> >> these very basic principles.
> >>
> >> Vito
> >>
> >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> >>
> >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> >> murder
> >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> maybe,
> >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels
> >> in
> >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> >> ones).
> >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> that.
> >> > ___
> >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >> > 
> >> >
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Adrian Raddatz]

Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help us
finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to harass
someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
indefinitely.

The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict account-->
operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
creations and a method of checking accounts by email.

Adrian Raddatz

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz  wrote:

> Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and enforced
> across our projects.
>
> Adrian Raddatz
>
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
>
>> Same here, ofc.
>> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities refusing
>> these very basic principles.
>>
>> Vito
>>
>> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
>>
>> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
>> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
>> murder
>> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except maybe,
>> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels
>> in
>> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
>> ones).
>> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring that.
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> >
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Adrian Raddatz]

Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and enforced
across our projects.

Adrian Raddatz

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:

> Same here, ofc.
> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities refusing
> these very basic principles.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
>
> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> murder
> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except maybe,
> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> > >
> >
> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels in
> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> ones).
> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring that.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Vi to]

Same here, ofc.
I still cannot understand how there could be online communities refusing
these very basic principles.

Vito

2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :

> On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy 
> wrote:
> >
> > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and murder
> > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except maybe,
> > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> >
>
> I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels in
> which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor ones).
> I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring that.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Alex Monk]

On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy 
wrote:
>
> The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and murder
> threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except maybe,
> definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
>

I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels in
which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor ones).
I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring that.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Jonathan Cardy]

I'm partly in agreement with Pine, this is more about policy than a bug and it 
should be being discussed on meta not phabricator.

I disagree with Pine re the IRC channels. If the people running a particular 
IRC channel want it to continue as the recommended channel from a particular 
Wikimedia wiki then it is reasonable for the community to require that channel 
to comply with community norms. What happens on IRC channels that are 
unconnected with the movement is arguably out of our control. IRC has been a 
problem area in the past, I doubt I'm the only person on this list who has 
discovered, sometimes long after the event that community IRC channels were 
misused either to canvas against them or to say things that you'd be blocked 
for saying on wiki. Clearly we can't implement an IRC policy on freenode 
channels that conflicts with freenode policy. But I'd be surprised if we 
couldn't require a stricter policy than freenode seems to for IRC channels 
promoted on wiki.

More broadly my concern with the approach is that it misses the main target. 
The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and murder 
threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except maybe, 
definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC. We need to think how to 
protect members of our community from people who barely count as members of our 
community and who may not even consider themselves as such.

There is an argument for being stricter about incivility amongst the community, 
I suspect with the ongoing greying of our communities this will happen 
regardless. My main concern is not with shifting the boundary of what is or 
isn't acceptable but with dealing more effectively with the worst stuff that is 
currently happening. That has implications both technical and for 
legal/privacy. I'd like to change our privacy and Checkuser policies to presume 
in favour of "fishing trips". If members of our community are being seriously 
harassed on wiki I think it should be the norm to check the IP address and see 
if any good hand accounts are also run by the same person. We all as 
individuals have patterns around our editing, it shouldn't be beyond the 
capabilities of modern technology to flag up a warning to the check users when 
a new editor appears with a similar pattern to a banned troll. Dealing with off 
wiki harassment is more complex, the technology and social mores may be outside 
our control. But some of the nastiest stuff that happens online such as revenge 
porn is illegal or at least culturally unacceptable pretty much everywhere. 
Tracking down where servers are, whose jurisdiction they are in and liaising 
with local law enforcement are big tasks. I'd like to see the movement and 
specifically the foundation and chapters as trail blazers in this.

Regards

Jonathan/wereSpielChequers


> On 20 Nov 2016, at 12:00, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> 
> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct(TCC) (Pine W)
>   2. Re: Implementing Katherine's Vision: "DiscussingDiscussions"
>  (Pine W)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 21:45:42 -0800
> From: Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>,  Matthew
>Flaschen <mflasc...@wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of
>Conduct(TCC)
> Message-ID:
>

[Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Pine W]

I'm forking this discussion from the (no subject) thread.

I think it might be a good idea to have some sort of guidance, such as a
TCC, for how incivility is handled in technical spaces beyond reporting
problems with WMF employees to their WMF managers and/or HR, because not
everyone works for WMF, so it might be good to have a way to handle
situations when someone who is not a WMF employee causes problems in
technical spaces.

However, I'm not sure that I agree that the TCC is "a (draft) community
policy, being approved by the community.  The community has already
approved a large fraction of it.  It's not a (draft) WMF policy."

A substantial proportion of the comments on the talk page (and the
archives) are from WMF employees, not community members. I realize, Matt,
that you have been attempting to recruit broader participation, but it
looks like the results have been less than one would have hoped.
Given WMF's history of clashing with the community about subjects such as
Superprotect, VisualEditor, and ACTRIAL, it seems to me that while WMF
participation in discussions such as this is good, the high proportion of
WMF representation on the talk page makes the resulting document more
likely to reflect the view of WMF and its employees rather than the larger
community. So, no, I would not consider this draft to be a community
document at this time. The proportion of participation from WMF staff is
too high.

However, there are some paths forward: (1) Proceed with this as a policy
that applies to WMF staff only, (2) get the WMF Board to approve the
document as a policy, or (3) get the document to pass a community RFC,
closed by a community steward.

My advice, if WMF wants this TCC to hold weight with the community, is to
put a lot of distance between WMF and this document. WMF can support the
document's creation, but should not be in a leadership role, and WMF staff
should be far less prominent on the talk page. That the lower the
proportion of WMF involvement in the creation of this document, the more
likely the document is to be viewed in a positive light by the community.

I don't mean to sound like I intend to halt the entire TCC process, but I
would advise proceeding with it differently than the talk page suggests has
been happening so far.

Regarding the applicability of the proposed policy to IRC, I view the
proposed TCC as requiring explicit opt-in from IRC channels through their
own internal governance processes. The TCC's assertion that it applies to
IRC channels does not, by itself, actually make that happen without
explicit opt-in from those channels; similarly, my drafting a policy on
English Wikipedia that claims to apply to #wikipedia-en would have no
validity without opt-in from #wikipedia-en.

I need to attend to other matters so I won't participate in further
discussions on this topic for the near future, but I welcome comments (and
differing opinions) from others. To reiterate: I think that there could be
benefits from a TCC, but I would suggest (1) softening the WMF's role in
the creation of this document and (2) stating that the TCC applies to IRC
channels on an opt-in basis.

Pine


On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Matthew Flaschen 
wrote:
On 11/17/2016 10:30 PM, Pine W wrote:

> As a reminder: IRC is governed by Freenode. Channels can have their own
> rules, and there are widely varying systems of internal governance for
> Wikimedia IRC channels. I think it's important to note that WMF and the
> Wikimedia community are guests on Freenode, and I'm uncomfortable with the
> proposition to extend a WMF policy into IRC channels without explicit
> consent from the ops of those channels; it seems to me that the TCC would
> be a per-channel opt-in on IRC, not a WMF blanket standard.
>

I just wanted to note that this is a (draft) community policy, being
approved by the community.  The community has already approved a large
fraction of it.  It's not a (draft) WMF policy.

(It is subject to Legal requirements like some other community policies,
but it seems this will only affect a small section.)

Thanks,

Matt Flaschen
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,