Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct
| From: | Paul M. Jones | Date: | Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:08:09 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] [Draft] Adopt Code of Conduct | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-90259@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi all,
As I have stated previously, I find the Contributor Covenant text objectionable, in that it couples
person, project, and politics, so that the person becomes answerable to the project for their
politics.
If there simply must be a code of conduct, they should be decoupled. To that end, I propose that the
entire "Code Of Conduct Text" in the RFC be removed, and replaced with this single
sentence:
We are committed to evaluating contributions within project
channels without regard to the contributor's experience,
ability, identity, body, religion, politics, or activity
outside of project channels.
Alternatively, if that's not specific enough, use this single sentence instead:
We are committed to evaluating contributions within project
channels (such as reporting issues, posting feature requests,
updating documentation, submitting pull requests or patches,
and other project activities) without regard to the
contributor's level of experience, gender, gender identity
and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal
appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion,
nationality, politics, or activity outside of project
channels.
Both of these use language cribbed from the Contributor Covenant, and add explicit protections for
politics and other activity outside the project. This decouples person, politics, and project from
each other, leaving each with its own separate sphere of influence. It also removes the scope of
resulting actions-to-be-taken from the expectations of conduct, and leaves it to the conflict
resolution language.
The replacement is restricted to project channels only. I predict, based on earlier comments, that
some will object to this. I opine that it is beyond the scope of the project to either reward or
punish members for their activity outside channels owned by the project. Even so, conflict in
non-project channels does occur. As such, I suggest adding the following text (or substantially
similar text) to the conflict resolution language:
Q: What about conflict outside of project channels?
A: If you feel conflict via a non-project channel is
unbearable, you should handle the incident(s) using the
means provided by that channel. For example:
- If you feel you are being abused via Twitter, you
might block or mute the person(s) you feel are abusing
you, and/or report the abuse to Twitter.
- If you feel you are being harassed via email, you
could set up a rule to delete or junk emails from the
person(s) you feel are harassing you.
- If you feel you are subject to a credible threat of
physical harm, you should report it to law enforcement.
Finally, although the original RFC text does not define "project spaces", I think that
"project channels" should be defined; for example, the official PHP accounts on Github,
Twitter, and Facebook, as well as all php.net mailing lists, and perhaps even all php.net email
accounts.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjones88@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php