-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
write community guidelines #71
Comments
See #66 for conversation to date, but new discussion should happen over here. |
tl;dr We now have:
The second in particular needs to be improved. |
Great article from Ada Initiative last week re: dealing with code of conduct violations: "Handling harassment incidents swiftly and safely" |
See also: "The Insidious Power of Not-Quite-Harassment"
|
My current thinking is that we should adopt Ada Initiative templates for a) Code of Conduct and b) Incident Response, and then think about additional, optional layers beyond that. Because, yes: we should explicitly prioritize a safe environment over, for example, the wholesale sharing of information. |
Interpersonal encounter—especially despite great differences—is a central value and goal for me. Openness to each other. Safety is a prerequisite for genuine interpersonal encounter. |
Picking up from #76 ...
(That's @duckinator in "On Open Companies, Consent, and Safety (among other things).") Hmm ... I would be more inclined to say "but not for every behavior," because focusing on behavior "takes the conflict out of the realm of values and concepts — 'is it okay to hug people without consent?' — and into the realm of facts — 'is this person hugging people without consent?'" (src). In general I'm reluctant to rule out ideas a priori, though the manner in which ideas are delivered would be a form of behavior, and I think we want to be clear about what tone is appropriate in Gittip spaces. Can you give some examples of ideas that you would see as being on Gittip's "unofficial list" of banned ideas, @duckinator? |
Here I'm thinking of double opt-in processes for open handling of both condemnation (delivering results of an incident investigation to the wrongdoer) and reconciliation (facilitating a process of apology, forgiveness, and reparation between wronged and wrongdoer). I do also want to think through "Some Thoughts on Handling Harassment and Toxic Behavior Privately." How does that relate here? |
Places primary emphasis on safety, with direct communication, behavior change, and reconciliation as secondary concerns.
See what you think of that revision, eh @duckinator @pjf et al.? |
More relevant posts, women's stories about a predatory man in the science writing community: quoted above: https://medium.com/@hannahjwaters/the-insidious-power-of-not-quite-harassment-857e2f71059a |
I'd like to change the "conflict team" to the "safety team" and use [email protected] |
Done. What else do we need on this? |
Reticketed from #66.
Over on gratipay/gratipay.com#1425 we're talking about guidelines for content published by users on Gittip. We also need guidelines for participation in the Gittip community as a discussant/collaborator, so I'm ticketing that as a separate issue here.
Open-source Codes of Conduct are the starting-point:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: