<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Simon Poole <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" target="_blank">simon@poole.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>The WMF is of particular interest, not just because they, at
least in theory, have a similar role in their overall movement as
the OSMF, but because they have multiple CoC or similar documents
tailor made for the venue, activity and groups that they concern.
Taking particular care on the hand to allow people working
together on a specific task do so in a friendly non-discriminatory
environment (in our case this would be mainly the working groups)
and on the other hand being careful not to stifle debate and
critical discussion of matters that concern policies, elections
and the central organisation (in our case the OSMF). <br></p></div></blockquote><div>I'm glad you brought in Wikimedia. Yes they are a similar organization to OSM but with a code which as you point out seems to work for them.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p></p>
<p>Now I do make the admission that for somebody that has never been
involved in OSM in an active way before, being dropped on to this
mailing list has to be bewildering, which goes for any mailing
list in times of high traffic, but to turn it in to an essentially
moderated list on which you don't dare raise issues or say your
mind because you might frighten somebody away that doesn't have
the context of the discussion yet, cannot be the solution. Maybe
we should simply revive osmf-announce and not automatically
subscribe everybody to this list, though I'm sure that will simply
result in people complaining that they are being cut out of
important discussions.<br></p></div></blockquote><div>I may have not made my proposal clear enough. My proposal is for OSM, under the policy guidance of OSMF, to adopt a code of conduct. Not just the osmf-talk list, but all OSM lists, forums, and events. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p>
</p>
<p>That, very seldom, we have events in which unacceptable language
is used, I count three in seven years of OSM (the major one being
two Americans calling each other names on talk-diversity,). is the
risk that we take by providing open communication forums, no CoC
will stop that happening, except of we turn this list in to fully
moderated. But that risk is by far outweighed by the benefits.</p></div></blockquote><div>OSM seems to be doing okay not moderating edits. I think the same approach should be used for mailing lists. OSM has a good process for handling issues of copyright violation, disputes, vandalism, etc. How DWG handles issues would be a good example for a group responsible for CoC reports. What this proposal does is provide an avenue for people to report violations of the code which is similar to the role DWG fills. Looking at the list of organizations with a code, I'm not aware of any that operate fully moderated.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Clifford</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us" target="_blank">osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us</a></div></div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch</div></div></div>
</div></div>