[LGM] [CREATE] Code of Conduct

[Louis Desjardins]

2014/1/18 Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com>

>  On 01/18/2014 06:12 PM, Andrew Chadwick wrote:
>
> On 17 January 2014 22:04, Louis Desjardins <louis.desjardins at gmail.com> <louis.desjardins at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  2014/1/16 Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com> <gpittman at iglou.com>
>
>  ******* Proposed LGM COC ********************
> [...]
> **********************************************
>
>  Thanks Greg for this edited version!
>
> To everyone: Does the proposed LGM CoC meet our expectations?
>
> What I see here is something easy to understand, concise, to the point.
>
> Without the idea of rushing anyone, may I ask if someone feels he or she
> didn’t have time to express an opinion, share a thought or bring up an
> argument we’d need to consider?
>
> Is it too early or are we ready for a vote?
>
>  It's a good statement of intent, and as such it has my tentative
> approval as an initial draft. I think it would needs to go further
> about con organiser responses as it evolves.
>
> The PyCon UK CoC (http://pyconuk.net/CodeOfConduct, full text below)
> does that very well, and it's about the tersest one with teeth that
> I've seen. I like the brevity and the "we trust" of its opening
> 'spirit' paragraphs. I like its reassurances to complainants in the
> third para (because they may otherwise not come forward, and/or may
> have a dread of not being taken seriously), and I like how the bullet
> point 'consequences' section enumerates specifically how it isn't
> fooling around.
>
> Anything based on it should absolutely enumerate different notions of
> appropriate behaviour to fit LGM's ethos, an excellent point Susan has
> raised upthread with what has to be *the* perfect example.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - ✁ - - - - - - - - - - -
> Pycon UK Statement on Diversity and Conduct
>
> Happily, PyconUK is a diverse community who maintain a reputation as a
> friendly, welcoming and dynamic group.
>
> We trust that attendees will treat each other in a way that reflects
> the widely held view that diversity and friendliness are strengths of
> our community to be celebrated and fostered.
>
> In cases of inappropriate behaviour (including unsuitable language and
> imagery in talks) please contact a PyconUK organiser directly and in
> private. Any complaint will remain confidential, be taken seriously,
> investigated, and dealt with appropriately.
>
> PyconUK reserves the right to carry out any of the following actions
> relating to a complaint:
>
> • The person concerned may be told to stop/modify their behaviour
> appropriately and a warning will be issued.
> • The person concerned may be warned that enforcement action may be
> taken if the behaviour continues.
> • The person concerned may be asked to leave the venue immediately
> and/or will be prohibited from continuing to attend PyconUK (without
> reimbursement).
> • The incident may be reported to the Police.
>
> (This document is released under a creative commons license[1].)
>
> [1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - ✁ - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
>  I guess you may have hit on something that seems to be on people's
> minds: they want "teeth" in this thing. There is a famous quote from
> Madeleine Albright when she was UN Ambassador for the US: "What's the point
> of having nuclear weapons if you can't use them?"
>

> How small does a meeting have to be to not display teeth? I see that as of
> Dec 23rd, PyCon had 800 people already signed up for PyCon 2014. We'd be
> likely overwhelmed with anywhere near that number! (i.e., gnashing of teeth)
>

Which gets me back to: are we ready for a vote on the text Greg has
proposed?

This may well take place in next Wednesday’s meeting, if we are ready.

Pratically, we could have a short but clear CoC with no description of
teeth. Why would we need that? The purpose is not about biting. We’ll take
"appropriate steps". Do we need to say more? This leaves the door open. It
doesn’t say _what_ will happen if... It says we’ll take "appropriate
steps". It’s up to us to find out if this is enough or if we need to really
say we have teeth, and describe them.

The most difficult part is in fact to handle any given "conflictual"
situation with diplomacy. I support an open and short yet clear CoC. PSF
has paved the road for us. Those few paragraphs are more than enough in my
view for the LGM. And if over time we end up thinking it is not enough,
then we’ll reconsider it.

I propose we put that on the agenda for Wednesday’s meeting.

Louis



> Greg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libre-graphics-meeting/attachments/20140118/4baeee67/attachment-0001.html>