Heh, an apology here, my autocorrect "fixed" your name, Yaron. I apologize for that and should have caught it. ... The trouble of multilingual corrections.
Moriel On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 11:37 AM Moriel Schottlender < mschottlen...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > I'm not going to get into the minutia and details of how the code of > conduct is or isn't good to work in your repo, that's a separate discussion > that I won't participate in by choice right now. > > I am simply pointing out that your own points made a declaration about how > working in the space you are in looks like. > > In the gerrit commit that started this thing, you, yourself, publicly > wrote this: > > > *"The Site Settings extension uses a bunch of WMF tools and services for > its development, including hosting. If some random person sends me a patch > for Site Settings by email, and I email them back and say "Your code sucks, > you nitwit" (or worse), am I violating the Wikimedia Code of Conduct?"* > > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/mediawiki/extensions/SiteSettings/+/437555/ > > This statement, the question itself, and the fact you are asking whether > this violates the CoC means, to me, and others who are unwilling to work in > a hostile environment, that you're unsure whether this is acceptable at all. > You might see this question as an innocent attempt to nitpick over the > specific details of whether by regulation something needs to happen. > I see it as a hint that you might **actually** think this is an acceptable > thing to do. > I don't know if you do. You might think it's not a bad response, but > rather a funny one. You might think it's acceptable because the original > code **was** stupid. I know people who think that, and that, for *their* > spaces, is valid. > > But then I choose not to spend time in that space. That's valid too. > Which is why when Amir said he won't get near your code, he wasn't making > a personal attack. He was making a conclusion based on what you wrote about > the way your space operates. > > That's not a personal attack no matter how much you try to shift the goal > post and talk about red herrings. > That's a consequence, and a reason of why the code of conduct was needed > to begin with. > > You might accept this consequence as acceptable. That's your choice in > your space. > But don't throw that on others as if by making a conscious choice to avoid > spaces that have a danger of being toxic, they're personally attacking you. > > Let's go back to the actual discussion at hand, instead. > > Moriel > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 11:05 AM Yaron Koren <ya...@wikiworks.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Moriel Schottlender <mschottlender at wikimedia.org> wrote: >> > Quite frankly, I don't blame people who regularly experience harassment >> > online to avoid spaces where the code of conduct is consciously only >> > enforced in parts of the space. >> > I, too, don't feel comfortable in joining that space, even for >> considering >> > potential interactions that I might encounter, and knowing that these >> > interactions, depending where they happen, may not be dealt with to my >> > personal ideal of what such space should be. >> >> Neither I nor any other extension developers are "enforcing" the code of >> conduct - that's up to a committee to do. >> >> > You stated that as far as you're concerned, there are interactions you >> > purposefully don't see as being governed by the CoC. >> >> I don't know what "purposefully" means there. There are interactions that >> are not governed by the CoC - how's that? >> >> > Some developers decide that they purposefully, in their repos, assume it >> > governs all interactions related to to work on the repo, and some, >> > apparently, do not. >> >> If anyone is "deciding" that, they're making an incorrect decision. >> Meaning, you can certainly say that you will not tolerate harassment, >> discrimination, etc. in personal emails as specified by the Wikimedia Code >> of Conduct - but as far as enforcement, you're on your own, unlike with >> the >> real CoC. >> >> Also, given that every extension had this file added in, how is a >> potential >> contributor to know who "decided" to embrace this file's statement and who >> didn't? Given the threat of harassment, it seems awfully risky to assume >> that everyone who didn't delete the file supports it. >> >> -Yaron >> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 1:23 PM Yaron Koren <ya...@wikiworks.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Moriel Schottlender <mschottlender at wikimedia.org> wrote: >> > > This isn't a personal attack, it's a consequence to your earlier >> email. >> > > >> > > You stated yourself, that one of the reasons you don't think a COC.md >> > file >> > > should exist in your repository is because not all interactions are >> > covered >> > > by it. While that might be true technically-speaking, it does make a >> > > statement to potential contributors about what they might expect in >> > terms >> > > of feeling safe and secure with a CoC in place. >> > > >> > > For those of us who "bad interaction online" are a norm rather than >> an >> > edge >> > > case, a statement that the CoC is not fully covering a space means we >> > don't >> > > go to that space if we can help it. >> > > >> > > Saying that one does not intend on touching a space where the >> > maintainer >> > > clearly stated the CoC is only partially in effect is not a personal >> > attack >> > > -- it's a consequence of what you said. >> > > A consequence that is also shared by others who may feel less >> > comfortable >> > > speaking up on public threads, but would avoid going into such spaces >> > all >> > > the same. Not because of who you are personally, but because of what >> > your >> > > statement about how your space is governed means. >> > > >> > > Whatever other claims and discussion is going on in this and the >> other >> > > thread, let's not try to make it sound like there's a personal attack >> > going >> > > on here. >> > >> > No, I still think it's a personal attack. I think we've already >> > established that the CoC does not cover all interactions, and that the >> > CoC.md file is thus giving false information. Some people have stated >> that >> > clearly, some have grudgingly admitted it, but no one has really argued >> > against it. Even you note that it's "technically" true, whatever exactly >> > that means. >> > >> > And of course, this file was put in place by a few developers - it >> wasn't >> > an opt-in choice. (It's still not 100% clear that it's even an "opt-out" >> > choice, though at this point it seems to be.) >> > >> > Given those two things, the presence of a CoC.md file in an extension >> > directory tells a potential contributor nothing - nothing about >> additional >> > security they're getting, and nothing really about the extension's >> > developers. Actually, it's worse than nothing, because it gives >> potential >> > contributors false comfort as far as the protections they'll have. If, >> as >> > you say, some people face a real danger of harassment everywhere not >> > covered by a code of conduct, then it's all the more reason to either >> > remove that file, or reword it, everywhere - so people know what they're >> > actually getting into. >> > >> > So, why should Amir want to avoid dealing with my code specifically? Is >> it >> > because he would have fewer protections? Clearly, no. It must be >> something >> > about me personally that would make him treat my code differently from >> > everyone else's. >> > >> > -Yaron >> > >> >> >> -- >> WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
