Re: Code of Conduct plan

I have followed this list for a couple of years, have benefited several times from quick and helpful advice, and wonder whether all this code of conduct stuff is a solution in search of a problem. Or, if there is a problem now and then, whether an elaborate code does a better job than reminding offenders that they’ve crossed a line marked by common decency or common courtesy. I think a list manager should have the right to expel repeat offenders. I doubt whether ‘proceduralizing’ offences against common decency or common courtesy makes it easier to police what is always a tricky boundary.

It is possible to spend a lot of time and energy designing bureaucratic solution that in the end does little good. My grandchildren were taught that “please and thank you sound so nice .... manners are important, be polite” sung to the tune of Frère Jacques. They don’t always remember it, but a longer poem wouldn’t help.

From: James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com>
Date: Friday, September 14, 2018 at 7:52 AM
To: "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>, "ik(at)dataegret(dot)com" <ik(at)dataegret(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-generallists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-advocacy(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-advocacy(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct plan

I find a lot of neo-con/trumpian political stances moronic, short-sighted, and anti-intellectual and therefore consider them offensive, an affront on my way of life, and a stain on my country.

1) Can I report anyone holding such views and discussing them on a 3rd party forum?

2) Could I be reported for saying the above on a 3rd party forum?

Obviously the pg mailing list isn't a place for such discussion, but is being a member of this community a deal with the devil to give up my right to free speech elsewhere?

Jim
On September 14, 2018 6:10:47 AM EDT, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:45 AM Ilya Kosmodemiansky <ik(at)dataegret(dot)com<mailto:ik(at)dataegret(dot)com>> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com<mailto:chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
> I really have to object to this addition:
> "This Code is meant to cover all interaction between community members,
> whether or not it takes place within postgresql.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__postgresql.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=BYjxekkm1qd5vvRFXRtzSk35tzn2FgzBWbZZf_O53G4&s=2J5h4ShLpyZtHe5CYuBvsEKDxkSxUtzXxffWGDSpOB8&e=> infrastructure, so long
> as there is not another Code of Conduct that takes precedence (such as a
> conference's Code of Conduct)."
>
> That covers things like public twitter messages over live political
> controversies which might not be personally directed. At least if one is
> going to go that route, one ought to *also* include a safe harbor for
> non-personally-directed discussions of philosophy, social issues, and
> politics. Otherwise, I think this is asking for trouble. See, for example,
> what happened with Opalgate and how this could be seen to encourage use of
> this to silence political controversies unrelated to PostgreSQL.

I think, this point has nothing to do with _correct_ discussions or
public tweets.

If one community member tweets publicly and in a way which abuses
other community members, it is obvious CoC violation. It is hard to
imagine healthy community if someone interacts with others correctly
on the list or at a conference because the CoC stops him doing things
which he will do on private capacity to the same people when CoC
doesnt apply.

If someone reports CoC violation just because other community member's
_correct_ public tweet or whatsoever expressed different
political/philosophical/religious views, this is a quite different
story. I suppose CoC committee and/or Core team in this case should
explain the reporter the purpose of CoC rather than automatically
enforce it.

So first, I think what the clause is trying to do is address cases where harassment targeting a particular community member takes place outside the infrastructure and frankly ensuring that the code of conduct applies in these cases is important and something I agree with.

However, let's look at problem cases:

"I am enough of a Marxist to see gender as a qualitative relationship to biological reproduction and maybe economic production too."

I can totally imagine someone arguing that such a tweet might be abusive, and certainly not "correct."

Or consider:

"The effort to push GLBT rights on family-business economies is nothing more than an effort at corporate neocolonialism."

Which would make the problem more clear. Whether or not a comment like that occurring outside postgresql.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__postgresql.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=BYjxekkm1qd5vvRFXRtzSk35tzn2FgzBWbZZf_O53G4&s=2J5h4ShLpyZtHe5CYuBvsEKDxkSxUtzXxffWGDSpOB8&e=> infrastructure would be considered "correct" or "abusive" is ultimately a political decision and something which, once that fight is picked, has no reasonable solution in an international and cross-cultural product (where issues like sexuality, economics, and how gender and individualism intersect will vary dramatically across members around the world). There are people who will assume that both of the above statements are personally offensive and attacks on the basis of gender identity even if they are critiques of political agendas severable from that. Worse, the sense of attack themselves could be seen as attacks on culture or religions of other participants.

Now neither of these comments would be tolerated as viewpoints expressed on PostgreSQL.org email lists because they are off-topic, but once one expands the code of conduct in this way they become fair game. Given the way culture war issues are shaping up particularly in the US, I think one has to be very careful not to set an expectation that this applies to literally everything that anyone does anywhere.

So maybe something more like:

"Conduct that occurs outside the postgresql.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__postgresql.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=BYjxekkm1qd5vvRFXRtzSk35tzn2FgzBWbZZf_O53G4&s=2J5h4ShLpyZtHe5CYuBvsEKDxkSxUtzXxffWGDSpOB8&e=> infrastructure is not automatically excluded from enforcement of this code of conduct. In particular if other parties are unable to act, and if it is, on balance, in the interest of the global community to apply the code of conduct, then the code of conduct shall apply."

> --
> Best Wishes,
> Chris Travers
>
> Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor
> lock-in.
> http://www.efficito.com/learn_more<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.efficito.com_learn-5Fmore&d=DwMFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=BYjxekkm1qd5vvRFXRtzSk35tzn2FgzBWbZZf_O53G4&s=nXSr3sJx-gkzLmudClvV0WcTKV9Nf452OZmsnaQTfMs&e=>

--
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
http://www.efficito.com/learn_more<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.efficito.com_learn-5Fmore&d=DwMFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=BYjxekkm1qd5vvRFXRtzSk35tzn2FgzBWbZZf_O53G4&s=nXSr3sJx-gkzLmudClvV0WcTKV9Nf452OZmsnaQTfMs&e=>

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.