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

[Louis Desjardins]

2014-05-26 8:39 GMT-04:00 Femke Snelting <snelting at collectifs.net>:

> 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).
>

Hi Femke,

I think the fact that "the examples are mainly gender related", while the
possible behaviors we want to avoid and act upon embraces a wider range of
threats, is at the heart of the concerns expressed here.

To sort this out, I would suggest we include a couple more examples that
are not gender specific (examples below).

I don’t know if this would make a consensus but I would hope so.

For one, I feel a bit uncomfortable with that only one link and after
having read the comments.

I also agree that the links should go towards a page we have control over
as Simon as pointed it.


> 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.
>

>From the Swansea University (UK) we have well written definitions and
examples followed by a section about what to do when being harassed or
feeling harassed that could inspire us for the "how to deal with issues".
https://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/academicguide/conductandcomplaints/dignityatworkandstudycombatingharassment/1introduction/


>From École Polytechnique de Montréal (English version of the document).
Especially the section about definition is of much interest in my view and
has the benefit of putting into a simple wording what is harassment without
going into all the details. Well worth reading, I think.
http://www.polymtl.ca/sg/docs_officiels/en/1310har3.htm

>From the London School of Economics
http://www.lse.ac.uk/intranet/staff/humanResources/reviewingAndRewarding/promotionAndReview/disciplinaryGrievance/harassment/examplesOfDifferentTypesOfHarassment.aspx

The American point of view
http://www.strategichr.com/shrsweb2/harassment_01.shtml

Some additionnal links:

The Ada Initiative
https://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/conference-policies/

The New York University Anti-Harassment Policy
http://www.nyu.edu/about/policies-guidelines-compliance/policies-and-guidelines/anti-harassment-policy-and-complaint-procedures.html

Python Software Foundation CoC
https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
and
https://us.pycon.org/2013/about/code-of-conduct/



>
> 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
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
> CREATE mailing list
> CREATE at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/create/attachments/20140526/0372f3c7/attachment.html>