[Board] Improve Community Behaviour

Helena Mitasova hmitaso at ncsu.edu
Mon Aug 6 18:49:09 PDT 2018


Thanks Cameron for wise words - I very much agree,

Helena

> On Aug 6, 2018, at 7:31 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Maria,
> Thank you for stepping forward and offering to drive a CoC initiative. It is a very worthy and often thankless role. 
> While I won't have much time to give to it, I'm willing to monitor a CoC email list and help where I can.
> 
> With regards to your text below, I suggest that a CoC committee should focus on language used and any personal attacks, but not on       the topic of conversation. Ie, I think we should drop the second paragraph (starting: "We want to remind the community that, up till now, local and regional events are not required to disclose their budgets and accounts. ")
> We also shouldn't be re-opening specific issues which appear (from what I'm exposed to) to have been resolved.
> I feel we should act swiftly, within days in email threads, resolve quickly, and move on so that people can move onto more productive activities. (Digging up an old example is likely to trigger a new spate of accusing emails.)
> I don't think we need to lecture the community again on our CoC principles. They have already been stated in the wrap up of the latest spate. But we should highlight any new initiatives that is being put into place.
> 
> Eg: reword and simplify to:
> Recent communication in the community have shown that we have occasionally slipped into unfriendly communication opportunities for improvement. To facilitate this a few of us have volunteered to act as facilitators under the banner of the CoC committee, with the aim of helping resolving differences quickly, making sure we have created a safe environment, so that we can get back to what we do best - creating great open software, data and communities.  If you would like to join us, then please get in touch.
> 
> Cheers, Cameron
> 
> On 7/08/2018 3:43 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> One comment, since this a longstanding issue we could change:
>> > that is unfortunately part of the recent OSGeo culture
>> With:
>> > that is unfortunately gradually become a part of our OSGeo culture
>> 
>> We could also take out "fighting" with something more constructive:
>> > We are all fighting for the same goals
>> With:
>> > We are all seeking the same goals
>> 
>> We have chosen examples from recent experience, which in fine. To be effective we may wish to cast a slightly wider net to illustrate this is not an isolated event.
>> 
>> > Or culture of openness should is here to empower and include everyone where we can be effective. It should not be used aggressively to call our individuals or organizations that are not in a position to speak.
>> 
>> So in addition to local event organizers:
>> 
>> > Other groups within our organization require a degree of privacy to operate effectively on our behalf. The board also requires a degree of privacy to negotiate relationships with our partners. The incubation process works privately with project teams to address legal issues, in collaboration the board and osgeo legal. Project teams also ask everyone to practice responsible disclosure around security issues that can have a wide effect.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 05:09, Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com <mailto:alexgleith at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi Maria
>> 
>> I have a couple of comments on wording:
>> Replace 'empathic' with 'empathetic'
>> I think that you want to replace 'assertive' with 'positive'? So '...communicate in a more positive way.' I might have it wrong here, though.
>> I think your intent is really good, and it's a great statement. One comment would be that focussing on the specific issue may distract from the more important issue, which is encouraging people to be nice! But it does probably need to be said still, so it's probably good how it is.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 18:44 María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com <mailto:delawen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> As mentioned on last board meeting, I'm summarizing and posting everything we got so far on this subject.
>> 
>> So this comes from many threads already. To simplify context: I'm trying to push some things to improve OSGeo as a safe space where everybody is welcomed and feel encouraged to work on our goals.
>> 
>> CoC committee, as suspected, is gone. I volunteered to pick up the task and be the new CoC committee. Shared some emails with Kristin Bott for this and she's happy with it. It would be good if it is not only me (worst case: what if I am involved in something the CoC has to review?), but for a start, that will do.
>> 
>> Actions: 
>> 1.- I need to get access to the CoC internal and public email. Jeff, I think you have privileges to do so?
>> 2.- We should have some kind of news saying this. Maybe we should wait for the following action?
>> 
>> I also wrote this statement to make them official. Pending more review. Remember I am not a native speaker and this is intendedly neutral. If it doesn't sound neutral, then please, correct me:
>> 
>> "Recent events in the community have shown that we have to work on how to make the communication friendlier. We all, as OSGeo, must remove the recent bullying and campaigning mentality that is unfortunately part of the recent OSGeo culture. Fair play is key on all aspects of communication both inside and outside the community channels, because an OSGeo member represents the community at all times. We should remember to be empathic and kind to all members of the community. We are all fighting for the same goals and we should encourage cooperation, not hinder each other. Disclosing private data or hinting threats is not helpful and can only make our community less comfortable for everyone. We will work on improving actions on harmful behavior and learn how to communicate on a more assertive way. We don't want to punish involuntary behavior that may be harmful, but improve it to make the community stronger and healthier.
>> 
>> We want to remind the community that, up till now, local and regional events are not required to disclose their budgets and accounts. Although we want to be as transparent as possible, we understand that each LOC can negotiate private agreements with different providers that benefit the community and can't be disclosed. This is a transparency we accept to give up in favor of being able to reach further. In any case, we kindly ask local and regional events to disclose as much information as possible, in addition to statistics and demographics of participants, to collect data that will help organize future events and improve diversity. All events, big or small, are important to our community and all of them are doing an outstanding work in expanding our mission and we want them to succeed."
>> 
>> Actions: 
>> 3.- Please, someone review or comment or suggest or at least say it is fine. 
>> 4.- Board members, if you don't agree, please, elaborate on how to improve it. I don't want to delay it much further.
>> 
>> The third thing I am working on is to get a revision of the CoC. For that I am doing first some research, but in the coming months (free time availability and more volunteers dependent) I expect to elaborate and review it to improve it. 
>> 
>> Actions:
>> 5.- I guess me, compiling more info. 
>> 
>> Greetings from the beach and have a nice day!
>> María.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>-- 
>> 
>> Alex Leith
>> 0419 189 050
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
> -- 
> Cameron Shorter
> Technology Demystifier
> Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
> 
> M +61 (0) 419 142 254
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine, 
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
Associate director and faculty fellow at the Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
hmitaso at ncsu.edu
http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>

"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20180806/9225b948/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Board mailing list