[OSGeo-Conf] Code of Conduct

Wed Jan 14 07:43:05 PST 2015

For those interested in data and documentation of past incidents, this was
linked to earlier,
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/index.php?title=Timeline_of_incidents

Whether you call it a CoC or common sense for politeness, once you get a
large enough group together, not everyone will share your opinion of common
sense or lack it all together.  A CoC is a way to formalize and let
everyone know in advance what is expected.  It also gives you a starting
point for dealing with problems if or when they arise.  Any of those
incidents listed above could happen at FOSS4G, the questions are: What do
we want to do in advance to reduce the likelihood that it does? and How
prepared do we want to be to respond if it does?

Ideally, FOSS4G/OSGeo would have a CoC and the enforcement would never be
needed if everything goes flawlessly forever.  A CoC that never needs the
enforcement portion used due to perfection is something I'm willing to risk
(and then we can argue whether it is unnecessary since it has never been
used or whether it is working since it has never been used).

This is the conference committee list so we limit ourselves to the FOSS4G
scope.

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Camille:
>
> who defines "bad things"? Who has authority to design any "system" ?
>
> why can we not just stick with the old system, which is already in place
> ("common sense, parents-thought system")? The system where if something bad
> happens to you (and/or you personally consider it bad) either you handle it
> directly by yourself at the spot, or you ask authority for help, which
> could be either conference stuff, OSGeo board member or police officer or
> any other person, which is in place?
>
> Thanks for discussion. I'm (and there are apparently more) just expressing
> my doubts about necessity of such rules. And yes, it seem to be new rule,
> "if you make FOSS4G, you need CoC" - but it was never needed so far, AFAIK
> not even for last two FOSS4G. Every issue could be handled without CoC in
> place just based on common sense for politeness. Again: just expressing my
> opinion.
>

> What I want to say one more time: If Seoul team things, they can not go
> any further without CoC, let them do it. If they do not feel so, it's their
> decision. Everybody is looking forward to be at nice conference, CoC is
> just *one of many ways*, how to setup things. I doubt, it's the best way.
>

I think that everyone agrees that Seoul 2015 gets to independently decide
what to do with a CoC.  This discussion is more about future events, i.e.
2016 RFP which is about to happen.  Quoting David Bitner,
"I would like to encourage the Conference Committee (and I am volunteering
to do much of the leg work) to provide guidelines for implementing a Code
of Conduct at events for all FOSS4G/OSGeo related events and to include
diversity initiatives as part of future calls for proposals for the
international event.

While I believe it is too late for the conference committee to make any
mandates to the Seoul team, is there anyone who knows the folks on the LOC
that would be willing to help me reach out to explain the importance of
these initiatives?"

Best regards, Eli

> Jachym
>
>
>
> Wed Jan 14 2015 at 13:01:28 odesílatel Camille Acey <
> camille at boundlessgeo.com> napsal:
>
> Jachym,
>>
>> I don't think we are expecting that any one action will ensure the safety
>> and well being of every attendee but OSGeo can at least take steps to make
>> sure we set a baseline expectation of behavior (not rules, just
>> expectations) for the community and show that there is at least a system in
>> place to handle bad things if/when bad or questionable things occur and are
>> reported.
>>
>> Just as a contributor agreement sets a baseline for those who want to
>> make significant contributions to a certain codebase so too should a Code
>> of Conduct set a baseline for anyone who wants to contribute to this
>> community. In FLOSS, we know that Freedom comes and is maintained  through
>> good stewardship of the community and the project and adherence to certain
>> principles.
>> Free as in free puppy not Free as in free-for-all.
>>
>> Camille
>>
>> On Wednesday, January 14, 2015, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Darrell,
>>>
>>> Maybe it was discussed in other communities  but not in this one. I'm
>>> often annoyed by some of the discussions we have too, but saying that does
>>> not bring us anywhere.
>>>
>>> I'm personally not convinced that existence of   CoC would eliminate any
>>> offences caused by some attendees. That is my opinion.
>>>
>>> FOSS4G is free conference organised on behalf of OSGeo. The
>>> responsibility comes from LOC to LOC every year around the globe. LOC is
>>> responsible for the conference and shall make sure, everybody will fell
>>> good at the event using instruments they feel are needed. You can (have to)
>>> convince LOC if there is something you would like to stress at FOSS4G or
>>> OSGeo. They are open to ideas, as the whole community was so far.
>>>
>>> All I'm afraid are new rules. I personally would like FOSS4G following
>>> the KISS principle. The more rules, the  farther we are from KISS, the less
>>> freedom. There already is genetic rule in this community: be kind to each
>>> other, listen to each other.
>>>
>>> So, in the opposite of Bart, I say: we shall always keep asking, whether
>>> we need new (or old) rules and why today's set of rules is not enough.
>>>
>>> Jachym
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Camille E. Acey
>>
>> Manager, Customer Development and Partnerships| Boundless
>>
>> camille at boundlessgeo.com
>>
>> T: +1 917.460.7197|M: +1 347.267.2016| Skype: camilleacey
>>
>> New York, NY - USA
>>
>> @boundlessgeo
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/boundlessgeo>
>>
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/boundlessgeo>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20150114/9b38c2af/attachment.html>