[CREATE] Last round of comments: LGM Code of Conduct

[Femke Snelting]

Dear Ale, Anders,

As you can imagine your point of view has come up in the many discussions that lead to the formulation of this document.

The reason to have examples included, is that experience learns (from many other groups that have done CoCs and/or that have dealt with harassment), that concrete cases are necessary in order for a CoC to work. The argument being that it should be explicit from the start that harassment is a reality and that it should not be the problem of someone that feels harassed to convince others that such behaviour exists. Even when the general tone of the document is constructive, this  CoC exists for a reason.

So while all involved in the drafting of it agreed to have examples, we felt it was not up to us to formulate a list of specific cases. We decided to refer to the timeline of incidents, as it is the only well-documented page on harassment in relevant contexts that we are aware of.

The LGM-CoC addresses all types of harassment, and not only those that are gender related. While I think the 'geek' and 'feminism' in the url is a detail, I do share your concern that the examples are mainly gender related (it is not true that they are only about harassment against women).

At the end of the day we were more concerned by not having any examples at all, than to have only examples of a limited  scope. Of course, if there are other sources that you can suggest, it would be very good to include them.

best,


Femke


On 26/05/14 13:06, a.l.e wrote:
> dear femke and all
>
> first thanks for your work on this document!
>
> the LGM CoC looks good to me.
>
> ... just one thing...
>
>> - I agree that the reference to examples was awkwardly phrased and simple is better:
>> "Some examples: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents"
>
> personally, i would prefer that line to be removed.
>
>
> on the one side, i'm not sure that a list of examples needs to be there. the document seems to be clear enough!
>
> on the other side, "geek" + "feminism" in the url and the fact that most (if not all) the examples are about women (i could not spot any about any other gender/sexual/skin/religious/you name it category that tend to be the target of "incidents"... but i have not read the whole page) does not match the idea that a CoC is there to protect each participant from any other "bad" participant. whether they are geek or not, males or women, or anything else they wish or happen to be.
>
>
> for sure, not a reason to reject the CoC. but -- in my eyes -- a detail that might be worth to be fixed...
> but you (plural) might also have very good reasons to keep that link...
>
>
> have a nice day and, again, thanks for the fine document!
> a.l.e
> _______________________________________________
> CREATE mailing list
> CREATE at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
>