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

Wed Dec 12 00:50:24 PST 2018

Dear Ben, all,

I think people might be confused about the "presumption of good faith".
Presumption does not mean that one can "hide behind" obvious bullying, it
does not even mean that people who actually do joke will not be
"convicted". The presumption of good faith means that reasonable doubt
should benefit the accused - not the accuser. From a probability viewpoint
removing the presumption of good faith would balance "guilt" at 50/50%. In
other words this would give an ill-intended accuser a 50/50 chance of
success by the act of accusation alone. With the presumption there is a
shift such that you might need to be guilty with a probability of more
than, say, 70% before conviction.

Probabilities aside I think that Arnulfs philosophical point is by far more
important: The openness and assumption of good faith is the keystone[1] of
our foundation.

Best regards,

Greg

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_(architecture)

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 02:32, Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben at transient.nz> wrote:

> Rather than guilty until proven innocent, I think the covenant proposes
> a neutral and evidence-based approach. Mandating good faith as a
> starting point unfortunately enables bullies who provoke a response and
> then hide behind "X can't take a joke" or other minimisation to further
> harm their victim. I have not seen this in OSGeo but I have seen it in
> several cases elsewhere and I hope we will all be sufficiently alert to
> prevent it. I think that a proportionate and sensitive response will
> encourage consideration of the feelings of others without harming our
> collegial atmosphere.
>
> As another cross-cultural example, several of our members have given
> names that are masculine in Italian but feminine in English, resulting
> in their occasional misgendering on mailing lists and pull requests.
> While I found this amusing and assumed that it was unintentional, I also
> knew that some might find such misgendering insulting or hurtful and in
> any case it was not a good precedent, so I took the time to gently point
> out the mistake in private (IIRC). In each case, the mistake was not
> repeated. We can all take little actions that contribute to a welcoming
> environment.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ben.
>
> On 11/12/2018 13:44, Jonathan Moules wrote:
> > Hi Maria,
> >
> > Just a thought, but I'm not sure getting rid of the assumption of good
> > faith is a good idea. To do so would be basically assuming people are
> > guilty until proven innocent which runs counter to how these things
> > should work.
> >
> > To use a personal anecdote, many years ago I had a black flatmate who I
> > was joking around with and I made a comment that it turns out is a
> > negative racial epithet. Being young and unworldly, I didn't know that
> > at the time and certainly didn't mean it in that context, it also has a
> > perfectly innocent context - the only one I'd ever been exposed to -
> > which is how I was using it.
> >
> > Now, reading your thebias.com link, I can see that the author there
> > would suggest I be pilloried for what was an honest mistake. They'd say
> > I was being "careless" or "ignorant" and stepping on their toes. But I
> > don't think either is fair because it's not reasonable to expect people
> > to know everything that could offend everyone, especially somewhere as
> > multicultural as the internet.
> >
> > For example, consider this symbol: 👍a simple thumbs-up emoticon that's
> > commonly used to signify "it's all good" and "thanks". Well, it turns
> > out that it's "an obscene insult" in some cultures! I didn't know that
> > until a few seconds ago when I went searching for a simple example.
> >
> > I have learnt over the years from experiences in both directions that
> > it's best to always assume good faith if possible. Humans may be the
> > species with the most complex communication on the planet, but that
> > doesn't mean we don't fail often.
> >
> > @Ben - Thanks for sharing World Human Rights day. I'm a long time fan of
> > the UNDHR!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > On 2018-12-09 12:49, 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
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/discuss/attachments/20181212/90d4bdd8/attachment.html>