xdg Digest, Vol 157, Issue 3

Daniel Stone daniel at fooishbar.org
Wed Apr 12 16:58:48 UTC 2017

Hi Philipp,

On 11 April 2017 at 12:40, Philipp A. <flying-sheep at web.de> wrote:
> Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> schrieb am Di., 11. Apr. 2017 um 13:26
> Uhr:
>> Constructive feedback on the specific form and wording of the CoC is
>> more than welcome. What would be even better is if you're able to
>> point to the experiences of other communities, the discussions they've
>> had, and where they landed. The exact wording isn't irreversibly set
>> in stone, and I'm sure we'll want to be tweaking it over time. What is
>> set in stone is that we (the fd.o admins, who unanimously approved
>> this change) are committed to this CoC, and will not be turning back
>> from it.
> This is great news, as this way, the identified problems with its wording
> can be actually used to improve upon it. I was probably too much in the
> “software license” mindset, where a layman can’t dare to change the wording
> without fucking up. But actual feedback to improve this, based on other
> communities’ experiences? Sign me up.
> For one, I’d like to point to the Rust community, which also uses a CoC that
> begins similarly to, but is less problematic than the CC:
> https://www.rust-lang.org/en-US/conduct.html
> Regarding constructive criticism: The CC’s “Enforcement” paragraph is highly
> problematic. Its intent is clearly to foster accountability and prevent
> harrassers going unscathed due to being buddies with a mod. But it only
> protects the reporter, while nothing protects the (maybe wrongly) accused. I
> want to see a more “innocent until proven guilty” mindset reflected in a
> CoC. Accusing people shouldn’t be a powerful tool for harrassers, and witch
> hunts should be discouraged.

Is the enforcement section your primary problem with the CC, and how
specifically (in terms of actual language used - or not used) do you
see Rust's CoC as improving on this? Is it the piece where it insists
on the CC being both followed and enforced? If so, I personally read
that to mean that reports cannot be ignored, and problematic behaviour
cannot be waved away. I _don't_ read it as an assumption that every
report must result in action being taken against the accused, no
matter what. If we provided a tool which allowed anyone to kick anyone
else out of a community just by presenting a few magic keywords, we
would have utterly failed; I don't think the CC as written has done

Thanks a lot!


More information about the xdg mailing list