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

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 6 May 2016, at 00:44, Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> 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.
This doesn’t follow.  There was a study last year (actually reproducing an
earlier result, but with a better sample size) that showed that women were
offered lower salaries when their gender was on the application form, but the
most interesting result was that the difference was more pronounced when women
were the ones doing the hiring.  It’s a mistake to believe that the only people
who hold subconscious biases against a minority group are people outside of that
group.  In particular, when you’re someone who has been successful at something
that is traditionally not an activity for people with whom you share some
characteristic there is a tendency towards beliefs in personal exceptionalism,
which can easily turn into a belief that everyone else in that group is inferior
(after all, it was difficult for you, and these others aren’t willing to put in
as much effort as you).

David

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3719 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160506/1adf2455/attachment.bin>

On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 10:14:43AM +0100, David Chisnall via llvm-dev
wrote:
> On 6 May 2016, at 00:44, Joachim Durchholz via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> This doesn’t follow.  There was a study last year (actually reproducing an
earlier result, but with a better sample size) that showed that women were
offered lower salaries when their gender was on the application form, but the
most interesting result was that the difference was more pronounced when women
were the ones doing the hiring.  It’s a mistake to believe that the only people
who hold subconscious biases against a minority group are people outside of that
group.
<Quote>
In particular, when you’re someone who has been successful at something that is
traditionally not an activity for people with whom you share some characteristic
there is a tendency towards beliefs in personal exceptionalism, ...
</Quote>

Hi David,
Agreed. But in such a case, this successful individual is going to face
bias and even bigotry against them at every step of the way. And one of the
most interesting aspects of bias and bigotry is those who are afflicted by it
are least likely to recognize it as such. And, of course, there are degrees of
this notion of being successful in a field of endeavor where such a minority
individual rarely or never succeeds. And the more rare such an individual's
trajectory is, the more intense the collective bias and bigotry that individual
is going to have to deal with will be.

A good case study is when Jackie Robinson broke into major league baseball. He
not only needed to have exceptional skills and talent as a baseball player, he
needed exceptional skills at absorbing the collective bias and bigotry he faced
on a daily basis for years and years.

I claim exceptionally talented minority individuals who are in the technology
sector face this reality on a daily basis. It's a different natured bias and
bigotry, but the motivations and consequences are very similar. And those who
are engaging in that bias and bigotry are least likely to recognize it as such.

Thanks to everyone for expressing their point of view. I've enjoyed reading
all of your thoughts!

enjoy,
Karen
-- 
Karen Shaeffer                 Be aware: If you see an obstacle in your path,
Neuralscape Services           that obstacle is your path.        Zen proverb