Please weigh in at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Dra... on whether to consider the text of the intro (section before "Principles"), "Principles", and "Unacceptable behavior" sections done.
See link for details on what this means.
Matt Flaschen
Le 10/09/2015 17:22, Matthew Flaschen a écrit :
Please weigh in at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Dra... on whether to consider the text of the intro (section before "Principles"), "Principles", and "Unacceptable behavior" sections done.
See link for details on what this means.
Hello,
I am not sold on having a more specific document instead of reusing the "Friendly space policy".
The differences being:
* extends perimeter to the virtual space (phabricator/gerrit...) * use a list for unacceptable behavior
Then the two sections which should probably not be part of the policy itself because they explain how its used. Namely the couple sections:
-> Enforcement -> Committee
Which would apply equally to the friendly space policy.
So yeah I am late in the battle, but in short I would rather extend our existing friendly space policy to virtual space and create another document explaining how we use it (Enforcement + Committee).
My 0.02€.
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Antoine Musso hashar+wmf@free.fr wrote:
Le 10/09/2015 17:22, Matthew Flaschen a écrit :
Please weigh in at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Dra...
on whether to consider the text of the intro (section before "Principles"), "Principles", and "Unacceptable behavior" sections done.
See link for details on what this means.
Hello,
I am not sold on having a more specific document instead of reusing the "Friendly space policy".
If you take https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy and then you
* add the content needed to cover online situations and report them online * change the conference organizers by an equivalent body users can report to (the committee) * add possible actions to be taken against violators in an online context
then we end up basically with the draft we are writing. Rachel Farrand (and therefore the Engineering Community team) is the main responsible of assuring and enforcing the Friendly Space Policy, and for this reason I have been checking that policy against this CoC all along. The Friendly Space Policy is based on http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment and unsurprisingly it shares a lot of DNA with the Contributor Covenant that our CoC is based upon.
Therefore, I think that "reusing the Friendly space policy" to cover online spaces leads in practice to the Code of Conduct we are writing down.
Then the two sections which should probably not be part of the policy itself because they explain how its used. Namely the couple sections:
-> Enforcement -> Committee
Which would apply equally to the friendly space policy.
These sections are still under heavy discussion, and there is in fact a proposal to start splitting content in other page(s) that would not be part of the Code of Conduct but would define how it is enforced. See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_conduct_for_technical_spaces/Dra...
So yeah I am late in the battle, but in short I would rather extend our existing friendly space policy to virtual space and create another document explaining how we use it (Enforcement + Committee).
Also note that the Friendly Space Policy is a WMF policy. I don't know which process would be needed to change it, but I guess it would be some sort of top-down process. The Code of Conduct is being drafted in a wiki page that anyone can edit, we have 185 edits by 22 contributors so far (662 edits by 46 contributors in the Talk page), and the whole process is in the hands of the Wikimedia tech community. These are additional reasons to consider the Code of Conduct as a better main policy, and the Friendly Space Policy as the useful tool for events that is already now.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org