[COC-discuss] Classification framework
Seven (aka Arnulf)
seven at arnulf.us
Wed Oct 21 04:13:22 PDT 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Currently 12 members total, minus the Nabble bot.
Cheers,
Arnulf
On 21.10.2015 12:41, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Hi Camille,
> +1 from me for your suggestions too.
>
> I'm interested to know who is subscribed to this list? It feels a bit
> silly writing to a list that doesn't have anyone listening on the othe
r
> end. If you are watching I suggest speaking up and introducing yoursel
f.
> Has there been discussions on a private list that I'm unaware of?
>
> Camille, if you are a list admin, would you mind letting us know how
> many people are subscribed to the list.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 21/10/2015 1:34 pm, Camille Acey wrote:
>> Thanks, Rob!
>>
>> If you know of any other resources or have any recent/relevant forum
>> or OSGeo experience that would inform these two tasks that'd be great
!
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Rob Emanuele <rdemanuele at gmail.com
>> <mailto:rdemanuele at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Chiming in just to say, +1 on those two suggested next steps.
>>
>> I'm not sure if anyone would take issue with using Google forms a
s
>> opposed to an open source reporting system run on OSGeo
>> infrastructure (given the recent discussions on OSGeo-Discuss
>> about code hosting), but I think that the ease of use for Google
>> forms would make it a great choice.
>>
>> The article on enforcement is very thorough, and I think it
>> provides a good method to approach enforcement in a reasoned and
>> de-escalating way. The line "Generally conference staff are not
>> equipped for evidence gathering: we suggest not going around and
>> "interviewing" others involved." The enforcers are not detectives
>> or the police, and it makes sense that the sole focus of any
>> actions would be "*the safety of your community members from
>> harassment*".
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> Thanks, Cameron.
>>
>> We are not looking to make any changes to the CoC at this point.
>> Our job is to:
>>
>> 1. put together process around how members can submit reports of
>> CoC violations
>> 2. create specific guidance for LOCs, moderators and the board
>> about how to deal with those reports and reporters.
>>
>> We put together a list of places to start here -
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/CodeofConduct_Documents#Resources
>>
>> I suggest we:
>>
>> 1. use this form as a starting point for Task #1 -
>> https://www.drupal.org/governance/community-working-group/inc
ident-report
>> (not sure if its ok to use Google Forms, that's what
>> drupal.org <http://drupal.org> uses)
>> 2. start an Enforcement page (useful info here
>> <http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassmen
t/Responding_to_reports>http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_an
ti-harassment/Responding_to_reports
>> )
>>
>> What do you think? Is anyone else out there? if so, please chime
in!
>>
>> Camille
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2015 6:57 PM, "Cameron Shorter"
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wr
ote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> I've drafted a suggested amendment to our CoC to help us
>> answer the question of what is/is not in scope of a CoC breac
h.
>>
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Code_Of_Conduct#Classification_Con
text
>>
>>
>> Classification Context
>>
>> This additional section proposed for version 2.0:
>>
>> As guidance, content should align with a film classification
>> of: 12+ or PG or similar. There are many country
>> classifications
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_content_rating_syst
ems>.
>> To remove ambiguity, we refer to the Australian PG
>> Classification
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Classification_Boar
d#Film_and_video_game_classifications>:
>>
>> * /*Parental Guidance (PG)*/ – Not recommended for viewing
>> or playing by people under 15 without guidance from
>> parents or guardians. Contains material that young viewer
s
>> may find confusing or upsetting. The content is mild in
>> impact.
>> o *Violence* should be mild and infrequent, and should
>> be presented in "a stylised or theatrical fashion, or
>> in an historical context".
>> o *Themes* should have a "mild sense of menace or
>> threat" and be "discreet"
>> o *Frightening or Intense Scenes* should be "mildly
>> frightening" and have "low intensity"
>> o *Crude Humor* should be "mild" or "low level"
>> o *Sex, nudity and drug use* should be mild, infrequent
,
>> "discreetly implied" and "justified by context".
>> o *Coarse language* should be mild and infrequent, and
>> be justified by context.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16/10/2015 6:38 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One thing I've been pondering since seeing the first fe
w
>>>> questions about
>>>> CoC being discussed is how to "classify" what is
>>>> considered a CoC
>>>> breach. I'm yet to see any hard guidelines as to what
>>>> is/is not
>>>> acceptable. (And this sucks up large amounts of
>>>> bandwidth on email lists).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You did good research on this for FOSS4G CoC so it'd be
>>>> great if you could get the ball rolling here!
>>> Ok, I'll start looking into it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looking around for what we can borrow as a standard
>>>> reference, I wonder
>>>> whether we can borrow from film classifications:
>>>>
>>>> I'm familiar with the Australian classifications (being
>>>> an Australian
>>>> myself), which are well defined:
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Classification
_Board#Film_and_video_game_classifications
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000 <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, W www.lisas
oft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2 9009 5099 <tel:%2B61%202%209
009%205099>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> COC-discuss mailing list
>> COC-discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:COC-discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/coc-discuss
>>
>>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter,
> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> LISAsoft
> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>
> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> COC-discuss mailing list
> COC-discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/coc-discuss
>
- --
Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlYnc1IACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b0N3wCfS0f7PzEeeBn40pm0gR9cZUeh
bP0An1i5ZYec8tn4nj2uaYTx8d0Mrcvu
=OICC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the COC-discuss
mailing list