couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Smith <jason.h.sm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache CouchDB Developer Code of Conduct
Date Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:18:00 GMT
Noah, may I propose a rule and consequences not listed in any of the CoCs
so-far:

Rule: No profanity

Consequence: private email from $somebody asking to stop (i.e. I propose
that this is the most minor transgression possible, but it's still
frowned-upon)

Background:

Sorry if this is bike shedding, but I wish there was less profanity in the
community. In private I am very profane. Just the other day, my own mother
told me how disappointed she was! And I've done it in this community too.

But I have resolved to try to use zero profanity in my professional life.

Casual profanity is characteristically Western. Not every society tolerates
profanity in educated circles. Where I live, Thailand, and across Asia,
profanity in the workplace is exclusively for the crass uneducated class.
It is unthinkable in an office setting. When westerners casually drop
F-bombs, they are unknowingly embarrassing themselves before a great
untapped software resource: non-Western programmers.

Secondly, this is only a suspicion, but I think profanity (and also cocky
faux hatred), is a shibboleth indicating manhood and that we are in a
men-only club. It's like a loud fart or belch, or scratching your groin.
Men generally curb that behavior in mixed company. It reminds me of bulls
locking horns to impress a mate. Maybe F-bombs and the anger it stands for
are scaring some women away from software. Could be wrong, though.



On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Jason Smith <jason.h.smith@gmail.com>wrote:

> TL;DR = Is immediate removal from the project really worth thinking about?
>
> Noah, can you think of an example infraction that could plausibly trigger
> an immediate removal from the project, for a first offense? Yes we can all
> think of hypothetical examples, but something plausible from this community?
>
> (Am I diving into too much specifics too soon?)
>
> I feel like a time-out (of many months or a year) is a pretty harsh
> consequence. I can't think of something (within expectation or project
> experience) that would merit much worse. Multiple offenses, or ignoring a
> time-out, sure: basically to me the only "major infraction" is "repeated or
> multiple willful normal infractions" if you get my meaning.
>
> Imagine a good person who is usually fine but happens to have a very very,
> very, bad day. And they cross the line badly on that one day. I shouldn't
> think they'd be removed for a first offense even if it is grave. Again, I
> am talking about expected or historical real-world behavior, not something
> hypothetical like, say, something criminal. The most egregious behavior I
> can think of (that we should spend time planning for) is severe
> intentional, hurtful, harassment or insult for no productive purpose. Even
> that, as a first offense from someone otherwise in good standing, I do not
> think merits expulsion. Suspension, but not expulsion.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> A requirement for me for our CoC is that we have a well defined
>> response procedure. This is a commonly done for conferences, but is
>> usually kept private to conference organisers. Obviously, ours will be
>> public.
>>
>> To give you an idea of what I'm thinking:
>>
>> - Minor infractions vs. major infractions
>> - A warning system for minor infractions (as is common in most
>> employment situations)
>> - "Time outs" to let people cool off from IRC, the mailing list, etc
>> - An escalation procedure in case warnings and cool-offs are ignored
>> or ineffectual
>> - Immediate removal from the project in the case of major infractions
>>
>> I know this all seems like depressing serious business. But
>> documenting this stuff so that everyone is on the same page, and we've
>> all pre-agreed to it will massively cut down on drama while allowing
>> the project to take swift action when needed.
>>
>> On 28 April 2014 21:48, Joan Touzet <joant@atypical.net> wrote:
>> > Benoit said:
>> >> This one looks really good. What's your plan about the social contract?
>> >> Take something adapted?
>> >
>> > In the context of this CoC it only refers to:
>> >
>> >   "We will not hide problems
>> >
>> >   We will keep our entire bug report database open for public
>> >   view at all times. Reports that people file online will
>> >   promptly become visible to others."
>> >
>> > so we can probably make this explicit, then point to the ASF Bylaws[1]
>> > and ASF "How it works"[2] for the rest.
>> >
>> > -Joan
>> >
>> > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/bylaws.html
>> > [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Noah Slater
>> https://twitter.com/nslater
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message