[COC-discuss] [OSGeo-Discuss] Changes (and proposed changes) regarding the Code of Conduct

Mon Dec 10 10:02:51 PST 2018

Thank you Mark!

Right now my biggest concern is being alone on the CoC. Once the board
finishes next year's budget, we can work on replacing the CoC with the
simpler version.

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:12 PM Mark Iliffe <markiliffe at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear María,
>
> I'm glad to see this progressing now the dust has settled from the past
> FOSS4G where the limits of a CoC were so laid bare. As before, let me know
> how best to assist in developing the CoC further. I sincerely hope that we
> can progress as a community in response to this call.
>
> Best,
>
> Mark
>
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 03:38, María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you Ben!
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:09 AM Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben at transient.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> María,
>>>
>>> thank you for taking the lead on this important issue. While in my view,
>>> the majority of OSGeo participants act with consideration and in good
>>> faith, a single malicious act is one too many. We get the behaviour we
>>> tolerate, and a strong code of conduct helps us prevent behaviour that
>>> we do not want. In addition to a code of conduct, we also need a
>>> complaint procedure to enforce it.
>>>
>>> Did we ever hear back from any other foundations about how they handle
>>> code of conduct enforcement?
>>>
>>> Note that I am not at this time available for any OSGeo roles, but I
>>> have subscribed to the coc-discuss list.
>>>
>>> Here are some of my opinions. In them, I will use words like "must"
>>> solely because I think that these words should be used in the OSGeo
>>> procedure, but please remember that these are just my opinions and I do
>>> not claim to be right or an authority on these matters. I am also not a
>>> lawyer. Whenever I refer to complaints, I mean CoC complaints not
>>> general complaints:
>>>
>>> - Everyone who is expected to handle a complaint must first be trained
>>> in the complaint procedure and the OSGeo code of conduct, have access to
>>> psychological and legal support, and be covered by OSGeo legal liability
>>> insurance. The latter likely includes all OSGeo officers.
>>>
>>> - Natural justice must apply to the complaint procedure. At some point,
>>> the respondent will receive the complaint, including the identity of the
>>> complainant and alleged witnesses. This must be disclosed to the
>>> complainant before they submit their complaint. We cannot act on
>>> anonymous complaints nor consider hearsay.
>>>
>>> - Code of Conduct enforcement is a civil matter and the standard of
>>> proof is balance of probability.
>>>
>>> - Do we ask complainants what redress they seek? This could range from a
>>> private or public apology from the respondent, private or public censure
>>> of the respondent by the conduct committee, or expulsion from OSGeo.
>>>
>>> - Complaints must be handled in confidence, except where the complainant
>>> makes them public. Breaches of confidence must be considered a CoC
>>> violation. Nothing in the procedure precludes the respondent from
>>> responding in public to a public complaint, nor shall either party be
>>> considered to have breached confidence if they seek redress through a
>>> legal authority or the courts.
>>>
>>> - María, you have already stated the need to have identified complaint
>>> handlers so that a complainant knows who will receive their complaint,
>>> and I agree. I think that, on receipt of a formal complaint, any
>>> complaint handler or other OSGeo member must forward the complaint to
>>> all complaint handlers who are not a party to the complaint (where
>>> parties include witnesses). Even with a web site form, expect half of
>>> complaints, especially the most serious ones, to be delivered to trusted
>>> individuals. The list of complaint handlers and the policy on who will
>>> receive a complaint must be prominent on the complaint submission form
>>> and information pages.
>>>
>>> - So, who is going to bell the cat? Consider outsourcing complaint
>>> handling to an independent external investigation, mediation, and/or
>>> arbitration service would remove any appearance of conflict of interest
>>> or bias, reduce harm to OSGeo complaint handlers, and protect OSGeo from
>>> legal liability.
>>>
>>> - We need a better term for complaint handler. "Conduct officer"? This
>>> would clarify their role and reduce inappropriate submission of general
>>> complaints. We need more than one. Conduct officers in their role of
>>> enforcing the code of conduct are acting on behalf of OSGeo and not as
>>> individuals.
>>>
>>> - Any complaint that may constitute a criminal offence must in the first
>>> instance be reported to authorities with jurisdiction unless the
>>> complainant is unwilling to do so. Local legal advice will likely be
>>> required. This may cover online activities: for example, the New Zealand
>>> Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015
>>> <
>>> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/DLM5711810.html>
>>>
>>> <
>>> https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/consumer-laws/online-safety-laws-and-rules/>
>>>
>>> prohibits online bullying and harassment and has resulted in successful
>>> prosecutions by NZ Police. Criminal complaints will take priority over
>>> but not supersede OSGeo CoC investigations, which can run concurrently;
>>> our procedure will need rules on how to handle this situation and
>>> protect the rights of both the complainant and the respondent. We should
>>> never ever think that we can handle internally something that should in
>>> the first instance be a police matter.
>>>
>>> Thanks again, María. In my view, CoC enforcement is the dirtiest job in
>>> the open source community, and I commend you for your efforts.
>>>
>>> Happy Human Rights Day! Celebrating the 70th anniversary of the adoption
>>> of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948:
>>> <https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Ben.
>>>
>>> On 10/12/2018 01:49, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
>>> > Dear OSGeo community,
>>> >
>>> > As you may already know, I have been working for the last months in
>>> > improving our community procedures[1] to make it a safer space. Recent
>>> > events in the community have shown that we have a lot of work ahead.
>>> >
>>> > We all, as OSGeo, must remove the recent bullying and campaigning
>>> mentality
>>> > that is unfortunately gradually become a part of our culture.
>>> 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.
>>> >
>>> > This has been a slow task, but there are some actions taking place:
>>> >
>>> > CoC committee members have become inactive. I volunteered to pick up
>>> the
>>> > task and lead a new CoC committee. Right now I am the only CoC member,
>>> but
>>> > I am looking for more volunteers. If only, to make sure that if I am
>>> > involved in any CoC incident, someone else can take care of it
>>> properly as
>>> > mediator.
>>> >
>>> > I want to change also the way incidents and violations of the CoC are
>>> > reported. I noticed there are reports being done on person and on
>>> private
>>> > email, but never through the official channels (which right now is a
>>> > mailing list).To improve this, I will ask the SAC to replace the
>>> mailing
>>> > list with an alias and a form on the website. Also, there will be a
>>> public
>>> > list of who receives those emails so people reporting incidents will
>>> have a
>>> > clear understanding of who is receiving the information and decide to
>>> > contact privately only a subset of the team. Replacing the mailing
>>> list by
>>> > an alias that sends the data directly to the inbox of the CoC team is
>>> > important, as sometimes incidents are not reported just because the
>>> person
>>> > reporting is scared to leave a trace of the report or is not sure who
>>> will
>>> > be reading the report.
>>> >
>>> > Another action I am going to propose is a change on the CoC itself. Our
>>> > community has grown a lot both in diversity and in numbers, and we
>>> need a
>>> > strict code of conduct that makes sure marginalized or harrased people
>>> is
>>> > always covered by it. We can't rely anymore on just common sense and
>>> good
>>> > faith.
>>> >
>>> > Once the new board is settled, I am going to propose to change the
>>> current
>>> > CoC for another like the Contributor Covenant[2]. As it is a CoC
>>> shared by
>>> > many communities, this has the advantage of receiving the upgrades and
>>> > experience from other communities. As you can see, it fixes some of the
>>> > bugs from our CoC, like the assuming good intent and good faith[3] part
>>> > that made the current CoC useless on most cases. I will propose to add
>>> some
>>> > foreword to adapt to specifities for our community, but in my opinion,
>>> the
>>> > latest version of the Contributor Covenant is easy to read, simple, and
>>> > cover most of what we need. My hope is that this new CoC can be
>>> adapted to
>>> > all OSGeo Projects and Events that don't already have a CoC, so we have
>>> > full OSGeo universe covered by default.
>>> >
>>> > I hope this actions will prove useful in the medium term and we don't
>>> have
>>> > to see more members leaving the community. We should remember to be
>>> > empathic and kind. We are all seeking the same goals and we should
>>> > encourage cooperation, not hinder each other. I know that developer
>>> > communities are very used to these bad behaviours, but I'm confident
>>> we can
>>> > grow better.
>>> >
>>> > Have a nice day!
>>> > María.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2018-August/011640.html
>>> > [2] https://www.contributor-covenant.org/
>>> > [3]
>>> >
>>> https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Discuss mailing list
>>> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben at transient.nz>
>>> Director
>>> Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
>>> New Zealand
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/coc-discuss/attachments/20181210/ff7dccb6/attachment-0001.html>