llvm dev - May 2016 - Resuming the discussion of establishing an LLVM code of conduct

Proposed alternative

DRAFT
--------------------------
LLVM Code of Conduct (LCoC)

Prologue: LLVM community as a whole strives for equality and respect
in all areas. With this in mind, we want to establish a few words that
help(s)? everyone understand what to do if there is ever questions or
conflicts.

Motto: Be respectful, have fun and do great engineering.

LLVM Community members: People in and around the LLVM community - this
crosses borders and lots of forms of communication.

Community moderators: The community[1] will vote for three moderators
who will hold the term for 1 year.

Moderators are to help with dispute resolution, conflicts and other
situations as-needed. They should uphold the community values, motto
and strive to be unbiased, objective, fair and apply common sense
principles to the situation as well as if any action is needed.

Moderator assistance: There's no way to create an exhaustive list of
scenarios, but in general if you feel uncomfortable with someone in
the LLVM community it's best to send a friendly email and include as
much as possible to - _____ at ____.__

[1] How do define who can vote - not everyone is on the mailing list..
this in itself is tricky..

On 5 May 2016 at 16:53, C Bergström <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
wrote:
> Prologue: LLVM community as a whole strives for equality and respect
> in all areas. With this in mind, we want to establish a few words that
> help(s)? everyone understand what to do if there is ever questions or
> conflicts.
"few words that may help"?

I think Fosdem's phrase is sublime:

"we expect [...] everybody to behave respectfully towards all others,
including those that are different or think differently from
yourself."

> Motto: Be respectful, have fun and do great engineering.
Also: code should be evaluated solely on technical merits.

> Moderators are to help with dispute resolution, conflicts and other
> situations as-needed. They should uphold the community values, motto
> and strive to be unbiased, objective, fair and apply common sense
> principles to the situation as well as if any action is needed.
This is perfect. No need to list what actions could be taken etc.

The conferences can have an additional clause regarding health and safety.

> Moderator assistance: There's no way to create an exhaustive list of
> scenarios, but in general if you feel uncomfortable with someone in
> the LLVM community it's best to send a friendly email and include as
> much as possible to - _____ at ____.__
Better not to focus on "someone", but with "some behaviour".
We don't
want which-hunts.

> [1] How do define who can vote - not everyone is on the mailing list..
> this in itself is tricky..
For now, the *only* viable thing we can do is commit access, though I
know it means practically nothing.

I haven't got a better idea, though.

--renato

FWIW, I like this version a lot better.  Keep it simple.

-Krzysztof


On 5/5/2016 10:53 AM, C Bergström via llvm-dev wrote:
> Proposed alternative
>
> DRAFT
> --------------------------
> LLVM Code of Conduct (LCoC)
>
> Prologue: LLVM community as a whole strives for equality and respect
> in all areas. With this in mind, we want to establish a few words that
> help(s)? everyone understand what to do if there is ever questions or
> conflicts.
>
> Motto: Be respectful, have fun and do great engineering.
>
> LLVM Community members: People in and around the LLVM community - this
> crosses borders and lots of forms of communication.
>
> Community moderators: The community[1] will vote for three moderators
> who will hold the term for 1 year.
>
> Moderators are to help with dispute resolution, conflicts and other
> situations as-needed. They should uphold the community values, motto
> and strive to be unbiased, objective, fair and apply common sense
> principles to the situation as well as if any action is needed.
>
> Moderator assistance: There's no way to create an exhaustive list of
> scenarios, but in general if you feel uncomfortable with someone in
> the LLVM community it's best to send a friendly email and include as
> much as possible to - _____ at ____.__
>
> [1] How do define who can vote - not everyone is on the mailing list..
> this in itself is tricky..
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation

Am 05.05.2016 um 18:05 schrieb Renato Golin:
>> [1] How do define who can vote - not everyone is on the mailing list..
>> this in itself is tricky..
>
> For now, the *only* viable thing we can do is commit access, though I
> know it means practically nothing.
No voting.
Establish consensus.

Just as for the code of conduct.

(I'm not seeing a consensus emerge on the CoC yet, just two camps who 
keep repeating their position.)

Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code of conduct
at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct and its pretty much
impossible to enforce.

After observing what is happening in many other communities in regards to women
in technology, I would be much more likely to participate in a community that
actually has a well thought out and meaningful code of conduct.

-Tanya


> On May 5, 2016, at 8:53 AM, C Bergström via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Proposed alternative
> 
> DRAFT
> --------------------------
> LLVM Code of Conduct (LCoC)
> 
> Prologue: LLVM community as a whole strives for equality and respect
> in all areas. With this in mind, we want to establish a few words that
> help(s)? everyone understand what to do if there is ever questions or
> conflicts.
> 
> Motto: Be respectful, have fun and do great engineering.
> 
> LLVM Community members: People in and around the LLVM community - this
> crosses borders and lots of forms of communication.
> 
> Community moderators: The community[1] will vote for three moderators
> who will hold the term for 1 year.
> 
> Moderators are to help with dispute resolution, conflicts and other
> situations as-needed. They should uphold the community values, motto
> and strive to be unbiased, objective, fair and apply common sense
> principles to the situation as well as if any action is needed.
> 
> Moderator assistance: There's no way to create an exhaustive list of
> scenarios, but in general if you feel uncomfortable with someone in
> the LLVM community it's best to send a friendly email and include as
> much as possible to - _____ at ____.__
> 
> [1] How do define who can vote - not everyone is on the mailing list..
> this in itself is tricky..
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

On 5 May 2016 at 22:19, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code of
conduct at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct and its
pretty much impossible to enforce.
The same way you feel about this code, we feel about the alternative.
It's only a matter of perspective.

> After observing what is happening in many other communities in regards to
women in technology, I would be much more likely to participate in a community
that actually has a well thought out and meaningful code of conduct.
I think I have expressed enough of my desire to get women into STEM.
If not, let me reiterate: 50/50, nothing less will do.

However, I wonder how much of that has ever had the risk to leaking
into our community?

My argument to Hal is that, none of that happened overnight. For that
to happen to us, our community would have to be permissive to abusive
behaviour for months, or years, and we'd notice a lot sooner than
that.

The worse cases I've seen was the kernel and docker, both fairly loose
communities, where it didn't seem to have *any* consensus on behaviour
whatsoever. We're not like that.

When kernel folks come to us and start swearing, we ask them to stop,
then we ignore their emails. That's better than and CoC could ever ask
for.

So, here's a turn on the tables...

 * Can anyone prove that a CoC would be more effective against abuse
than the already very effective and cost free method we use?

 * Can anyone come up with a threat that the current consensus would
not protect us from, and at the same time, a CoC would be the *only*
alternative?

 * Can anyone prove that, just writing "we don't condone abuse, let us
know" is in *any* way (including legal) worse than a text that was
written by someone else and people seemed to like?

Unless we have clear answers to those questions, Occam's razor tells
me we should just be our good selves and show people with behaviour,
not words, how nice we are.


cheers,
--renato

Am 05.05.2016 um 23:19 schrieb Tanya Lattner:
> Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code
> of conduct at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct
> and its pretty much impossible to enforce.
Regardless of what kind CoC you have: if it comes to having to enforce 
it, the community has stopped being open and welcoming.

So I think this approach is attacking the problem that you have after 
you already lost.
> After observing what is happening in many other communities in
> regards to women in technology, I would be much more likely to
> participate in a community that actually has a well thought out and
> meaningful code of conduct.
First, let me state that I'm fully aware that women are subject to 
harrassment. It's one of those sad facts in life.

Still, I don't see how one can write a CoC that does not single out a 
group. Prohibit harrassment against women, and you single out non-women 
as potential offenders. The same goes for any other rule.
Worse: if you forbid something, people will start getting creative about 
how to abuse it. There are some genius trolls out there that will stay 
just below the threshold of actual harrassment (enforceable rules need 
to be spelt out clearly, which means that these trolls will stay below 
that threshold by a hair's breadth). There are people with weak 
arguments who will abuse anti-harrassment rules to fling accusations; 
they never get credibility, but they successfully sidetracked a 
technical discussion into a behavioural one.

Don't forbid things. That's just going to give people ideas.
Instead, encourage things.
And give those who feel harrassed or threatened a mail address to turn 
to. Don't say anything that even vaguely hints that an offender is going 
to get punished; instead, say that the address is for advice and help.
Word it constructively, not restrictively.
It's called framing, and it is an enormously powerful social tool.

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Tanya Lattner <tanyalattner at llvm.org>
wrote:
> Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code of
conduct at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct and its
pretty much impossible to enforce.
>
> After observing what is happening in many other communities in regards to
women in technology, I would be much more likely to participate in a community
that actually has a well thought out and meaningful code of conduct.
That's a pretty rude reply without actually having explained your
position very well, I'm offended.

My simplistic approach outlines a vision, states it's mission and
gives a mechanism to clearly and easily resolve issues. What more do
you want? (It's imho impractical to list *everything*) Further, it's
simple and easy to read - Why must I face a wall of text when I just
want to read code.

I respect your opinion, but lack of words doesn't mean it wasn't
actually well thought out. The "best" design is the most simple one
which gets the job done... I don't need extraneous verbosity just you
want it

On 5/5/2016 4:19 PM, Tanya Lattner via llvm-dev wrote:
> Having a code of conduct like this is just as bad as having no code of
conduct at all. It trivializes the importance of a code of conduct and its
pretty much impossible to enforce.
Code of conduct should reflect the community standards, not define them. 
These standards come from the minds of the members of the community. A 
CoC that states this much and outlines the core principles underlying 
these standards is a statement of faith in the community itself. It 
stresses the fact that the community can enforce its own standards, and 
in doing so be guided by the core principle of respect, and not by a 
list of prohibited behaviors.

I believe that it will behoove each member treat others with respect and 
to oppose unacceptable actions. When the enforcement of such standards 
comes from the genuine conviction, and not simply from a document, it 
strenghtens the community as a whole. Pointing to a document only 
invites searching for potential loopholes.

-Krzysztof

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation