[oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,

I again am sorry this text is not on Wiki, but on site, put there
unchangeable.
I would like it to be moved away from OI site and put to Wiki for
editing for the time being.

>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
> Once approved,

Approved by who?
To approve it, you firstly got to form named council and have norms for
decision making in it.
So there is no one to approve it, there should be named body that
approves it.

> this document will provide community guidelines for a safe,
> respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person who is
> willing to contribute to the OpenIndiana community. It applies to all
> “collaborative space”, which is defined as community communications
> channels (such as mailing lists, IRC, submitted patches, commit
> comments, etc.).
>
>
>     Core principles and expectations:
>
>   * We are respectful and appreciative towards peoples work, time, and
>     effort.
>   * We are tolerant of the right to have opposing views.
>   * We recognize our public actions determine the public perception of
>     the project.
>

Rule number 0 is being on topic. Only subrule of it is 'personal'
things, because they represent a form of going offtopic. Going Offtopic,
together with 'personal' things is "Trolling", known on internet by that
name for a long time.

>   * Participants must ensure their language and actions are free from
>     personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks.
>   * When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants
>     should always assume good intentions.
>
>
>     What will not be tolerated:
>
>   * Open hostility, and or abusive language.
>   * Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.
>   * Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, or participate
>     in a pattern of behavior which could be considered harassment.
>   * Filibustering – (replying with negative or opposing viewpoints to
>     every post in a mailing list thread).
>


This whole 'not tolerated' section is void and made with unprecise language.
It is simply not needed having in mind 'Core principles' section'.
In this state whole section should be deleted.
It is not precise and it is much too open to all kinds of misuses and
represent a threat to the community as a whole, because many and all
trolls will misuse it for waging private personal wars.

People are expected to be people like they are, not to have one face on
internet and another in Real Life, sometimes it is needed to express
itself in a way that this "Not tolerated" part will damage.
"Not tolerated" part is damaging community because it is negative not
precise, have in mind "too pinky" way of looking at the things and world
is not made of "Pink unicorns" to be ideal and nor it should be.

Revisiting old issues and reopening bugs is important freedom to have,
including being positive and negative as one likes.
One can not make people better and if filtering people by having only
"Pink unicorns" in the community, that would just not be possible.
Scratch whole section to dust and start building on something positive
as needed.
And actualy 'not be tolerable' is NOT in a sense of OI community.
OI community should BE tolerable it is against community to list 'not
torelable' list of thigs as a "goals".
OI goals are NOT searching for "not tolerable" things, but perfecting
those that are good.

So no "Witch hunts"needed - "not tolerated" part promotes "witch hunts"
and that is _very_ bad for community.

>
>     Reporting violations:
>
>   * Violations of the CoC should only be reported to the maintainers
>     via direct messages on IRC, twitter, or via E-mail and will be
>     handled confidentially.
>
This is regarding - mailing list maintainers , - IRC channel operators ,
- Source code repository maintainers and can not be intermixed between.
Since not the same people are expected to have all roles it would stop
manhunt on all levels of community.

I don't think any part of managing such requests should be held in
private in a sense that inner circle of community can't see what is
going on.
OI is not a secret private society to held seret meetings and have
rituals in dark roooms.
As much as things could be held in open, they should and I see very
little number of things to be held in closed, actually..

>  *
>       o Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be,
>         made public.
>

This is part of "secret police" question, where it is infusing FUD
instead of discussing things in public, that is alway better, to be
transparent and open.

Doing thing openly (like open source and free software used) have many
benefits and it is the same for community work.

>  *
>
>
>         Sources
>
>   * Adopted from the Project-FiFo Code of Conduct
>     <https://project-fifo.net/coc.html>.
>   * Further inspiration derived from the FreeBSD Code of Conduct
>     <https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html>.
>

I don't know for anyone's inspiration, but it is not needed here to
mention direct competition in a way that we are not part of FreeBSD nor
ever will be, unless all BSDs accept copyleft licensing/CDDL .
Advocacy can't cope with constant reminders of another projects, I think
they have enough links on internet to point ot their site(s) already.
OI things should be at least original because in OS distribution, being
original is a main thing. (Separate from other things and be better).


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/attachments/20160719/42babea6/attachment-0005.html>