Re: Let's Do the CoC Right

I was hoping to let this thread lie. However because I think there is a
need for people to sit back and wait for the draft to be circulated, there
are a couple more thoughts that are important to add. I am working on one
more blog post on the topic but will not further participate in this
discussion until the draft is circulated.

There are, however, a few remarks to be made that I hope will help lessen
some of the tension within the community over this issue.

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz
> wrote:

> On 24/01/16 13:48, Regina Obe wrote:
>
>> This is mostly in response to David's recent comments. I should say
>> David,
>> you are really beginning to make me feel unsafe.
>> By unsafe I mean my mental safety of being able to speak truthfully
>> without
>> fear of being kicked out of a community I love.
>>
>> I do not think we need a Coc and if we do, it's only to protect me from
>> people like this Kurtis guy:
>>
>> https://twitter.com/siloraptor/status/690637345972981760
>
>
Just for the record, I think core is in a position to determine whether one
would be helpful and I am not. LedgerSMB has really been made better by
adopting the Ubuntu Code of Conduct (thanks, Josh Drake!), so I am not
opposed to having a code of conduct. What I am opposed to is adopting a
code of conduct which positions the community as culture war
battleground. I think the Contributor's Covenant is more or less intended
to do exactly that.

Core has spoken that they will create one. I them that it will maintain
the general political neutrality of the community (and again for the
record, I don't see the topless dancer conference issue as one that
compromised that political neutrality either). So as far as I am
concerned, the question of do we need one is resolved.

>
>>
>> So if we have a Coc, I want all people who are on Core and Coc committee
>> to
>> be exempt from it. Because if I can't trust them I can't trust anybody in
>> the PostgreSQL group.
>>
>> So here are some comments to your comments David:
>>
>>
>> 3. If I understand correctly, the impetus for adopting a CoC (which,
>>>
>> believe me, I laud in no uncertain terms) was this post by Randi Harper
>> about her experience reporting abuse to the FreeBSD community:
>>
>> >
>>
>> http://blog.randi.io/2015/12/31/the-developer-formerly-known-as-freebsdgirl/
>>
>> Ideally, by adopting a CoC and an enforcement policy, we can try to
>>>
>> prevent bad experiences for people reporting abuse. However, in this
>> example, the abuse, which came from a
>>
>>> FreeBSD committer and was aimed at another, took place on Twitter, not in
>>>
>> a FreeBSD forum. However, the rules of the FreeBSD community at that time
>> did not cover abuse outside
>>
>>> sanctioned community forums. As a result, the FreeBSd core:
>>>
>> I brought that up by the way and is what broke my camel's back about
>> simply
>> ignoring this nonsense and going about my business doing PostGIS and tech
>> writing.
>> I personally went and talked to all the people that supposedly harassed
>> Randi and guess what?
>> They happened to be very nice people, that seemed emotionally traumatized
>> by
>> her unjust assaults and her hiding behind (I'M A WOMAN YOU CAN'T TOUCH ME
>> -
>> trump card).
>> In search of the truth, I found new friends.
>>
>
As a maintainer of other open source software I have a different view.
Having now read the blog and some other things, I think it is worth saying
a few things. This isn't about what a CoC should or should not cover. My
comments, as before, are intended to highlight the realities that come with
trying to manage a community. I trust the core team to come up with a code
of conduct that doesn't make merely expressing a political position
elsewhere a possible violation. This has been floated as a need from the
beginning and I don't see that going away.

Let's get two things clear from the start:

1. Online harassment is real and damaging, and
2. Any outside authority is in a low-knowledge position regarding what to
do about it.

In other words, the software maintainer is not in a position to adjudicate
a dispute, particularly when the remedy demanded is to exile a committer.
Conduct on lists, IRC channels, etc. where there are witnesses, they are
community space, etc. are one thing But going to conduct elsewhere not
only feels like overreach but making mistakes is also more costly and there
is less we really can do.

Add to that the price of possibly implicitly making political viewpoints
off-limits for people who are involved in the economic commons creation
process and you have a real potential for problems.

So I won't judge either side in the Randi Harper incident (I don't have
personal knowledge or the time to read through everything). But I will say
that writing to maintainers demanding that someone is kicked off a project
for communications outside the project space is not something any sane
project maintainer is likely to take seriously, precisely because of the
lack of knowledge issue. Randi in her blog post is entirely correct that
you can't solve interpersonal disputes the same way you resolve technical
problems. I would go further and say that managing community is entirely
political.

I will also say that any hard enforcement policy will quickly become a tool
for harassment in itself. That was the point of the hypothetical over
dueling email sigs and gay rights.

>
>> I don't want to even go into detail about the torture in community and
>> outside she put this poor guy thru what she put him thru I would expect
>> her
>> to pay a million dollars in law-suits.
>>
>> https://twitter.com/siloraptor/status/689969604102328320
>>
>> As for her, she blocked me because I said after studying the evidence I
>> found her accusations baseless.
>>
>>
>> Look, I'm not an authority on this stuff, either. But I understand that
>>>
>> rules, such as those in a Code of Conduct, must be explicit and as
>> unambiguous as language will allow.
>>
>> Those who claim to be authorities are the most narrow-minded,
>> self-absorbed,
>> culturally sheltered people I have ever met. They can only think of
>> unambiguity in their own minds.
>>
>> Chis Travers has demonstrated, that though he's white, he's been exposed
>> to
>> so many cultures that he has a sense of how each feels. His experiences
>> make
>> him an authority.
>>
>
I guess I had better correct something. i think the concept of authority
here is dangerous. Hopefully we come together as a community and treat
eachother with humanity, regardless of our political differences,
differences in identity, differences in views on hot button issues. Done
well, a code of conduct can serve as a reminder of this. That doesn't mean
that the differences disappear elsewhere or that they don't cause major
clashes elsewhere. But it means that in the community spaces we treat
eachother with humanity, and ideally that everyone can then be safe and
secure in the economic efforts for the commons we are creating.

> George Winkless has faced abuse and bullying. He knows what it is when he
>> sees it. Forget he's white. His experiences make him an authority.
>> Josh Drake has to put up with 2 women every day being the only guy in his
>> immediate family. Ironically he probably has a better perspective on the
>> "How women feel?" story than I do.
>>
>
Also keep in mind (my wife is Chinese-Indonesian), one thing I have learned
is that women in different cultures feel very differently about things.

>
>> If I'm in my husband's family meeting -- "Hmm Regina likes this food, I
>> wonder if that means all non-Chinese will like this" - curiously enough
>> they
>> all pass me there - Red-bean porridge dessert, and I remain puzzled why
>> Chinese hand out desserts that their people don't seem to care for.
>>
>
Try getting white Americans to eat sea cucumbers (haisom).... haha

>
>> if I'm in an all-male group, I'm asked, "You're a woman, do you feel FOSS
>> is
>> a rape culture. Has someone tried to rape you in conferences? Do you feel
>> unsafe" And I'll
>>
>> a) Point them to Josh Drake, cause he's had more experience dealing with
>> women than I have
>> b) Also point out that I've lived under the shadow of my older brothers,
>> following them around, had boy hand-me down toys, had a mother who was
>> "Daddy's favorite girl".
>> So essentially I'm a Tom-boy that feels extremely uncomfortable in all
>> female groups. They look like me, but they are foreign creatures to me.
>> I
>> feel I understand the "male" psyche better if there is such a thing.
>>
>> Finally I've suffered a lot of bullying in youth (and I mean real unsafe
>> kind like running from the bus when being chased by a gang of Italian boys
>> in an all-italian neighborhoo ready to lynch you kind of bullying) and I
>> bet
>> most geeks have, so we are all very experienced on the subject and I would
>> hope wouldn't wish it on anyone else. We don't need a Coc to tell us
>> that.
>> I also think PostgreSQL community is VERY diverse. So I doubt any Coc is
>> going to make us more so and probably less so, as the more minority a
>> group,
>> the more fear they will have tripping over a Coc booby trap.
>>
>
What a CoC (we use the Ubuntu Code of Conduct) enables me to do in the
LedgerSMB community is to approach people who are a little out of line and
remind them to behave. If necessary will do it in public but that is rare.

>> So the point is stop assuming who has experience and who doesn't simply by
>> how people look.
>>
>> The irony is that PostgreSQL is so diverse that a Coc leads to nothing but
>> huge arguments about what's okay in one culture and not another. We can
>> only
>> go by intent and not what was done. If we can't say that, then a Coc does
>> us no good. I've already violated all Cocs at least 3 times in this whole
>> conversation.
>>
>
If a CoC addresses culture war topics, my view is that it is a bad CoC.
Also from the discussions, I feel confident that such will not be a problem
here, because I think that almost everyone agrees we don't want a culture
war CoC. I would go further and say that I think most people recognize
that positioning PostgreSQL as a political battleground over hot-button
issues internationally would be the death of the project.

>
>> Thanks,
>> Regina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with Regina, especially about the dangers of a CoC, and not
> needing one.
>
> You can tell the truth, and offend someone, even if not intentionally -
> for example: try having a sensible discussion with a Creationist!.
>
> I'm a 'white' Married to a Chinese and lived in several countries
> (including Sierra Leone), plus been on the Internet since 1991 - but I
> don't consider myself an authority, but probably had more relevant
> experience than most. Not had any significant trouble on the Internet, and
> even the 'worst' (which was exceedingly minor) would not have been
> addressed by any practical CoC.
>

I say this as a white American who has lived most of my life in small towns
(places disparagingly called redneck country, flyover country, etc).

I think one has to see the current push as an aspect of American culture
wars, and the fact that a central part of American white culture is the
idea that what is good for Americans is good for everyone else. In other
words, one often sees these sorts of issues as culture wars turned global.

I don't think that ideology should be a factor in whether one can
participate in economic commons, and I think furthermore going that route
would hurt most the least powerful groups. But I think on this I am
preaching towards the choir.

Again, I wont respond further on this thread. I hope that the comments
above are things that bring us together rather than things we argue about.

>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

--
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor
lock-in.
http://www.efficito.com/learn_more