[Osmf-talk] May 2017 use of Code Of Conduct (CoC) for Membership control in HOT US Inc internal governance
rory at technomancy.org
Sat Dec 2 22:04:25 UTC 2017
Yes the original point was about something else, but I've seen many "We
shouldn't be afraid to have this conversation", to get a bit wary.
Yes, OSM is quite topic based, and Holocaust denial is quite rare, but
CoC's often apply to other spaces where people are identified with the
project, and 2 (maybe 3) of those examples did happen.
(i) "OpalGate" was when a core maintainer tweeted transphobic stuff
(ii) someone wrote homophobic stuff that was syndicated to
planet.mozilla.org (we have blogs.osm.org which isn't all OSM stuff),
(iii) "Google Memo" was in the line of "women are biologically bad at
coding", if a prominant OSMer blogs/tweeted in support of that, would
that be a CoC violation?
When crafting a CoC, we should think about what spaces should be
covered, and if certain statements, regardless of their civility, fall
foul of the CoC.
On 02/12/17 20:35, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Saturday 02 December 2017, Rory McCann wrote:
>> Things like "Are gay men a threat to children?", "Did the Holocaust
>> happen?", "Are women biologically stupider than men?", "Are trans
>> women in a women's bathroom a threat?" "Are black men biologically
>> more violent?" "Are muslims terrorists?" *MUST* have no place here,
>> even you talk about them in nice, calm, reasonable way.
> I don't think this has anything to do with the matter at hand. All OSM
> communication channels are purpose oriented - there is no true
> off-topic channel where you can discuss things with no relation to OSM.
> You don't need a CoC to sanction such discussions - just like you do
> not need a CoC to prevent spam.
> Michelle's comment is about something completely different, it is about
> the value of uncomfortable and inconvenient communications (and i would
> add to that even offensive communications) to a progressive, tolerant
> and open society. Such communication would be severely affected by
> a 'be nice' style CoC. Dismissing that with the argument that a CoC is
> necessary to prevent statements denying the Holocaust is - frankly -
> fairly weird.
More information about the osmf-talk