[Osmf-talk] Proposal - OSMF Should **NOT** Adopt a Code of Conduct
Rafael Avila Coya
ravilacoya at gmail.com
Sun Dec 3 23:48:05 UTC 2017
Hi, Ian:
> The point of a Code of Conduct is to codify or write down what we think
> common sense is. As has been pointed out here countless times, not
> everyone's idea of common sense is the same.
You are right. I agree. So I withraw "common sense" as it is also
subjective.
Cheers,
Rafael.
On 04/12/17 00:04, Ian Dees wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Rafael Avila Coya <ravilacoya at gmail.com
> <mailto:ravilacoya at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi, Emily:
>
> On 03/12/17 23:06, Emily Eros wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> As someone who generally doesn't participate in these mailing
> lists, I very much disagree with this statement:
> "Some people feel frightened to participate in mailing lists?
> Well, I think it's very exaggerated and makes me smile in general."
>
> I can wholeheartedly say that YES, this is a space that I don't
> feel comfortable participating in. It's great to see people
> passionate about OSM, but this space feels fraught with
> hostility and personal tensions - some of which goes years back.
> It's easy to feel like saying something is going to leave me
> feeling attacked. For me, I don't see an obvious way to
> contribute and try to make this better, so YES, it is very
> tempting to just disengage. I know I'm not alone in that, so I'd
> really encourage you to take it seriously when people say that
> they don't feel comfortable contributing to the mailing lists.
>
>
> I take it very seriously: the sole idea of a CoC makes me frightened
> and feel unconfortable.
>
> I follow and participate in many mailing lists (Spanish, French and
> English). Tell the talk-es about a CoC and then come here to tell me
> what they think... And some of the people in favor of a CoC are
> talking about a CoC for the overall OSM community, no less.
>
>
> To me, it seems like all the loudest voices are the ones having
> this conversation. As someone who participates less, I can say
> that the existence of a CoC (carefully drafted, with community
> input and caution about how to design this well) is something
> that would make me feel more comfortable here.
>
>
> Loud? We are writing, not talking here.
>
>
> I don't mean to speak for Emily, but it's clear that some people post
> more, use stronger language, and nitpick others' points more than
> others. I can see how that might be taken to mean "loudest". Constant
> pointed replies with a clear disinterest in learning or changing your
> opinion are exhausting and make it hard to participate.
>
>
>
> "In that context, and without any intention to offend anyone,
> I'd give more value in this matter to the opinion of people who
> are more likely to be the victims of harassment and abusive
> behavior, compared to the opinion of white males who argue out
> of the safety of their privileged status."
>
>
> White males... privileged status... yes, that's true. But we don't
> need a CoC for that, we need just common sense and be aware of the
> little details that lead to genre inequality. We can handle that,
> maybe with difficulties, but we can, because we are a civilized and
> healthy community. It's a question of listening to each other, but
> talking freely, not under presure or autocensorship.
>
>
> The point of a Code of Conduct is to codify or write down what we think
> common sense is. As has been pointed out here countless times, not
> everyone's idea of common sense is the same. It can vary depending on
> culture and background. As has been mentioned before (I'll link to this
> excellent FAQ again:
> https://www.ashedryden.com/blog/codes-of-conduct-101-faq#cocfaqcensorship),
> a Code of Conduct isn't designed to censor on-topic, healthy
> conversation, it's designed to reduce hate speech and make a community
> more inclusive by showing that the community sticks up for those with
> less representation.
More information about the osmf-talk
mailing list