[Members] NEW: XEP-0458 (Community Code of Conduct)
dave at cridland.net
Mon Jun 14 10:03:45 UTC 2021
On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 13:51, Daniel Pocock <daniel at pocock.pro> wrote:
> On 11/06/2021 13:16, Dave Cridland wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 19:31, Daniel Pocock <daniel at pocock.pro
> > <mailto:daniel at pocock.pro>> wrote:
> > On 10/06/2021 19:57, Jonas Schäfer (XSF Editor) wrote:
> > > Version 0.1.0 of XEP-0458 (Community Code of Conduct) has been
> > > released.
> > >
> > I notice that a lot of professional organizations have a Code of
> > A Code of Ethics tries to establish a balance between the rights of
> > member and the rights of the organization
> > In comparison, many Codes of Conduct simply end up creating Kangaroo
> > courts.
> > I'm not sure that's a correct characterization - some organisations have
> > both a code of ethics and a code of conduct, but in researching these
> > things, the general advice seems to be to get a code of conduct in place
> General advice? Or pressure from bigger organizations funded by Google?
> Many small organizations have come under pressure or influence to have a
> CoC when they request a booth at an event or a speaker requests travel
> funding. If the XSF received such pressure or influence it would be
> useful to disclose that.
No, no, and no.
By "General Advice" I mean advice published generically by groups promoting
women in tech, LBGQT groups, and so on, as opposed to "Specific Advice"
given to the XSF - I'm not aware of any of the latter and nor did I seek
A lot of this general advice is conflicting - I've tried to resolve the
conflicts as best as I can in the text I've written and would greatly
appreciate feedback on it.
The Board did (as noted in minutes), discuss CoCs for some time before I
started writing, including discussing some of this general advice.
We have had no pressure from any organisations I'm aware of; and had we
received any I would certainly ensure this was known. We have had explicit
comments from individuals on the fact we do not have a Code of Conduct in
some areas, as Matt Wild notes.
> In practice, it is very murky
> After people elected me as Fellowship representative in FSFE, I have
> publicly commented on misuse of the Code of the Conduct there. Various
> people showed me messages they received from Community Teams. In each
> case, the person was afraid to speak or seek help.
> No matter how the accusations are written, it often creates bad feelings
> for the recipient. Some people admitted leaving organizations rather
> than appealing. When they receive any kind of message from somebody
> with a uniform and badge, they just want it to go away.
> Moreover, as we are all remote, there is a tendency to write down too
> many things in a dispute. In an office environment, if there is some
> minor dispute, people usually have a meeting and resolve the problem
> verbally. When you make written records of a problem, it makes the
> problem appear bigger and it creates gossip culture.
> If you are unaware of the recipient's environment and somebody sends
> them a written reprimand it can be particularly harmful. Consider all
> those people with periods of depression (10% of the population will have
> that at least once) or reprimanding somebody in the week that they lost
> a family member. These are things that actually happen in some
> organizations now.
> These written reprimands are often delivered at bad times: sometimes the
> volunteer is on holiday or it is evening in their timezone. It is not
> clear if that is always deliberate. Nonetheless, if a Conduct Team
> interrupts somebody's rest then there is every risk that their future
> responses and interactions will reflect that intrusion. The strategy is
> therefore counterproductive.
> When Debian's men-with-a-badge sent the rape accusations to Jacob
> Appelbaum they demanded a response in 48 hours. Nobody can respond to a
> rape case that quickly. He didn't answer them so they went to the press
> and started doxing him. You may think this would never happen in XSF
> but I suggest watching this move, The Experiment, there are various
> other re-makes of the same movie about the real Stanford Prison Experiment:
> In some cases and in some countries, a message sent by the Conduct Team
> could itself be classified as an act of harassment. This is a situation
> to avoid and for good reason.
It may surprise you, but I'm broadly in agreement with you (though I would
explicitly not comment on specific cases of which I am unaware of the
I note some of your issues in the XEP itself, as I hope you saw, but I'm
happy to make more explicit that, in particular:
* Involving the Conduct Team should be routine, and not reserved for
* Equally, the Conduct Team need not do anything overt, and probably
shouldn't for the vast majority of cases. Sanctions, formal Actions, and
public discussion ought to be anything but routine.
* Exclusion and harassment by the Conduct Team are indeed exclusion and
harassment, and the Code of Conduct applies to the Conduct Team and Board
as much as, if not more so, than anyone else.
> > I think both of these are, indeed, positive ways to improve how people
> > interact with each other - but I don't see why you'd want to do those
> > instead of a code of conduct.
> The point is this: if you have a Code of Conduct but you don't have
> anything else then:
> a) the community standards may not really change much
> b) you have some punishments that you didn't have before
> If you invest in positive efforts then:
> a) the community standards /do/ improve
> b) you are /less likely/ to have punishments
I appreciate your point but introducing a Code of Conduct is intended to be
a positive effort.
Furthermore, the Conduct Team is a first step in measuring "community
standards", and without that there is little possibility of saying whether
standards change much, improve, or get worse.
Also, we should make clear that the intent of Sanctions and Actions is not
punishment, retribution, or revenge. It is to maximise inclusion and ensure
that the maximum number of people feel comfortable participating in our
Finally, you are correct in your assertion that creating a CoC is not the
end of the process, but the beginning.
> Given that the XSF and XMPP is fundamentally about communication (from a
> technology perspective), I would suggest that this is a community that
> could seek to take a step back and look at the big picture.
> Understanding the ways that people communicate and behave can help
> improve things in both the technology and organizational domain. It is
> an opportunity for XSF to show significant leadership by putting the CoC
> on hold and doing a wide-ranging examination of online communities,
> remote working issues, membership rights and human rights as they all
> intersect with the CoC.
I'm not sure that I disagree with this, except that I strongly feel that
not putting in place a Code of Conduct is not a sign of good leadership and
putting one in place does not in any way preclude putting effort as a
community into broadening our efforts in the ways you suggest.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members