[diversity-talk] OSM code of conduct: starting points

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/09/2014 05:49 AM, Jo Walsh wrote:
> If you kept a central Code very short and obvious then you could adopt
> it and then kind of subclass it when you had more specific needs - such
> as at SoTM or on the mailing lists...

This sounds like a good plan to me. If done well, the central Code could
essentially be a just slightly more verbose version of "Don't be an
asshole" (like Jo said, "a few points that a person would obviously have
to be a real asshole to disagree with.").

More specific Codes could then be made as "subclasses" for mailing lists
(potentially including the help site, forums, IRC - or have separate for
those), for mapping itself, conferences etc. where the basic rule of not
being an asshole is elaborated and examples are given about how you
could be an asshole at a conference, on a mailing list, etc.

Some things would have to be carefully worked out - for example, "don't
break the law" couldn't be part of a mapping code of conduct because our
(Chinese) mappers *do* break (Chinese) law and we're actually rather
thankful that they do.

Also, if a code is really only any good where it can be enforced, we
should avoid establishing codes of conduct for areas beyond our reach -
for example, I hear that in some countries the OSM community is largely
organised in Facebook groups and we can't do anything about that, nor
can we do anything about people behaving like an asshole at a pub meet
somewhere. (Or can we - should we attempt cross-media prosecution so
that we ban someone from editing when they're misbehaving on Facebook
etc.? Worth a thought but fraught with problems.)

What really gives me pause is Serge's statement. It seems to me that the
very idea of a Code is to create a norm beyond which nobody must stray;
at the same point the raison d'etre of the Code is to make things more
inclusive. Now Serge raises the issue that there might be people who,
due to a condition they cannot influence, don't fit the norm - they
always talk too loud, always interrupt others, or whatnot. Standard
societal behaviour would be to - sooner or later - exclude them because
they don't fit the norm. "Sorry, no loudmouths - clinical or otherwise."

It's a bit of a contradiction to build a Code of conduct that will
actually codify the exclusion of these people and therefore create a
less welcoming environment for them than the current non-Code environment.

But my gut feeling is to not make an exemption for them. If someone
violates the Code because of a clinical condition then I might be a
little more polite towards them but a transgression remains a
transgression and the inclusiveness must stop somewhere.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"