Thank you Shiz for taking the time to review and comment on my proposal.
Since you started with clause 3, I will step right in, and say: from the
feedback I got, it is utterly clear that it completely misses the point.
So I will entirely rephrase it (not using any of the suggestions because
they are more a confirmation of step 2 - do not offend others - than
what was actually meant by - do not get offended).
About step 4, you are right that it is important to explicitly state
that actions will be taken "with a response appropriately proportional
to the fault."; but examples are out-of-scope: they call for more
exhaustive specifications in the CoC, while this is what we want to
avoid (it will take more time and we, AFAICT, prefer to trust the
developers as a whole than to write a canonical document that will be
interpreted according to who shouts louder).
For point two, exactly for the same reason as for point four, we do not
want explicit listings (and let's not give potential ill-intended people
a complete todo list), but I will add 'doxing' as it apparently makes
The 'and' in point 6 is very much intentional. It means that we will
only care about stuff happening outside of the community if it is technical.
Finally, point 5 does not define alpine moderators, because we have no
other definition for it than the developers. So I guess that will have
to be an amendment for later on.
So here is the new version:
Alpine (AKA Alpine-Linux and Alpine-OS) Code of Conduct (CoC)
1. This CoC is to provide community guidelines for creating and
enforcing a safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for
any person who is willing to contribute in a safe, respectful,
productive and collaborative way. It is especially not meant as an
exhaustive law, to automate moderation, or to prevent thinking.
2. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of personal attacks, doxing, and disparaging remarks of any kind,
including, but not limited to, racial, ethnic, gender-related,
religious, political, sexual-orientation related slur.
3. This document is not about censorship or exclusion. Censorship is an
extreme measure, and shall only happen as a consequence of applicable
state law. Exclusion should be decided unanimously by the developers (or
in case of exclusion of a developer, by the developers who are in the
project for longer than the person to be excluded).
4. Any sustained disruption of the collaborative space (mailing lists,
IRC etc.) or other Alpine events shall be construed as a violation of
this CoC and appropriate action will be taken by the Alpine community
5. Any amendment made to this CoC should be approved unanimously by all
Alpine developers (i.e. all people who have commit rights on the
6. The CoC is only about interaction with the Alpine community. Your
private and public lives outside of the Alpine community are your own.
Any issue arising outside of the Alpine community and not directly
technically related with the Alpine maintained software shall neither be
discussed nor arbitrated within the community.
On 5/12/2017 2:21 AM, Shiz wrote:
> Hi Theo,
> First, thanks for doing this — I believe that adopting a CoC will help us
> provide handles to those in the community who see or are subject to abusive
> behaviour to address them in a safe and productive manner.
> There’s two (not too fundamental) issues I see with your current proposal:
> 1) The wording of clause 3. While I understand what you’re trying to say,
> the way it is being said seems far from neutral (and possibly wrong, as
> I’m sure under a lot of circumstances I would be considered a “social
> justice warrior”, as well many people that would want to contribute to
> Alpine), needlessly scaring people off in this especially charged
> political climate. I believe this section could be reworded in a far
> more neutral manner while still preserving its intention, maybe like this:
> “This document is to be used as stated in clause 1 for the health of the
> community, not as a beating stick for other people. Please assume the
> best intentions of people to a reasonable degree, and try to talk out
> differences first — sometimes people simply misunderstand each other.”
> I see William also proposed another variant on IRC that I may like even
> "Participants may disagree on the methods or opinions of others, but it
> is important to maintain the assumption of good faith. Alpine is a diverse
> project representing many viewpoints, and as such, disagreements are likely
> to occur. It should be assumed that all participants are working for the
> advancement of the project.”
> Where I’d possibly append “ and community” to the last sentence.
> 2) Clause 4 currently lacks examples of appropriate actions that can be taken
> by the community. I think it’s important to at least note the scope of these
> actions, so people realise that it is serious and can lead to more than
> simply a slap on the wrist. Maybe adding an additional clause with something
> like the following text may help elaborate on that:
> “Appropriate measures depend on the nature and severity of the case in
> question and may range from, but are not limited to, official warnings to
> temporary or permanent exclusion from community communication channels and
> removal of developer status or other conferred privileges.”
> And a few mostly random, smaller thoughts:
> * Maybe clause 2 should be expanded a bit to not just include direct personal
> attacks but also situations like harassment, stalking, and doxxing;
> * I’d change the “and” in clause 6 to and or, as harassment behaviour within the
> Alpine community may not directly pertain to Alpine-related software. In my
> opinion it should relate to both the community and the software that arises
> from it.
> * Clause 5 nicely defines Alpine developers, but we have no such definition yet
> for Alpine community moderators. Maybe adding a simple one would be helpful
> for people to identify who to address complaints to?
> Again, thanks for doing this, and I hope we can have an inclusive but concise
> CoC at the end. :)
> - Shiz
>> On 12 May 2017, at 00:49, 7heo <7heo_at_mail.com> wrote:
>> Hey people,
>> a few of us have been discussing every now and then the possibility of ever needing a CoC.
>> Following an exchange of opinions with some of the long-time Alpine developers today, I decided to come up with a CoC asap, for two reasons:
>> 1. Abuses in the community would have an objective ground to be fought on.
>> 2. Nobody could then come claiming we do not have a CoC and present us with a much more harmful and complex alternative (as it has been the case in many open source projects already)
>> Here goes my proposal (followed by explanations for each point), loosely based on the proposals from the PostgreSQL mailing list:
>> Alpine (AKA Alpine-Linux and Alpine-OS) Code of Conduct (CoC)
>> 1. This CoC is to provide community guidelines for creating and enforcing a safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to contribute in a safe, respectful, productive and collaborative way.
>> 2. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free of personal attacks and disparaging remarks of any kind, including, but not limited to, racial, ethnic, gender-related, religious, political, sexual-orientation related slur.
>> 3. This CoC is not about being offended, nor giving weapons to so called social justice warriors. One should always assume good intentions. As with any diverse community, anyone would otherwise eventually get offended at something.
>> 4. Any sustained disruption of the collaborative space (mailing lists, IRC etc.) or other Alpine events shall be construed as a violation of this CoC and appropriate action will be taken by the Alpine community moderators.
>> 5. Any amendment made to this CoC should be approved by all Alpine developers (i.e. all people who have commit rights on the repositories).
>> 6. The CoC is only about interaction with the Alpine community. Your private and public lives outside of the Alpine community are your own. Any issue arising outside of the Alpine community and not directly technically related with the Alpine maintained software shall neither be discussed nor arbitrated within the community.
>> 1. Alpine is about contribution first, community second. The community only exists for the sole purpose of contributing together to Alpine. Not the other way around.
>> 2. Such an contribution-welcoming environment can only happen when people leave their personal different at the door. Toxic behavior (like personal attacks) have no place in our community. i.e.: "Your work sucks" is fine while "you suck" isn't.
>> 3. The FOSS community has recently seen a drastic increase of lobbying for exclusion, and censoring attempts, against some contributors, from certain groups. Offensive and toxic behavior within the community will be dealt with according to point two. Offensive and toxic behavior outside of it will be ignored according to point six.
>> 4. As explained in point one, the main and foremost goal of our community is to support contribution. Anything threatening or impeding contribution is therefore directly harming the primary goal of our mailing lists and IRC channels; and has to be prevented.
>> 5. Again, as explained in point one, the goal of the community is contribution. This CoC, discussing it, and all the work related to it are wasted time in regards to the technical progress. This requirement is meant as a discussion deterrent, as it will be pointless to discuss any proposal to the CoC as soon as one developer disagrees.
>> 6. We do not care if you torture kittens or beat up puppies outside of our community. As long as you are keeping things separated, we will.
>> I hope I made it well enough that we do not have to spend too much time discussing it.
>> Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
>> Help: alpine-devel+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Received on Fri May 12 2017 - 03:20:38 UTC