Re: Adopt Ruby Code of Conduct

Hi, On 19/02/16 13:08, benjamin barber wrote:

The Ruby Community Conduct Guideline We have picked the following conduct guideline based on an early draft of the PostgreSQL CoC, for Ruby developers community for safe, productive collaboration. Each Ruby related community (conference etc.) may pick their own Code of Conduct. This document provides community guidelines for a safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to contribute to the Ruby community. It applies to all “collaborative space”, which is defined as community communications channels (such as mailing lists, submitted patches, commit comments, etc.).

    - Participants will be tolerant of opposing views.

    - Participants must ensure that their language and actions are free of
    personal attacks and disparaging personal remarks.

    - When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants
    should always assume good intentions.

    - Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be
    tolerated.

This is good because it doesn't try to legally redefine harassment, and

doesn't support blacklisting based on ideological views, which is something considered illegal many US states (like California, Oregon, Washington). More importantly it doesn't create a inquisition to police people's politics, they are free to be a Men's rights activist or feminist, they can support equal rights or affirmative action, and it wont effect their code or work abilities. Most importantly it doesn't allow a persons feelings, to override the technical merits of a persons arguments, as critics of the SystemD have been labeled as violating the code of conduct. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2014-July/451692.html

What can 'reasonably' be considered harassment differs from person to person. What does 'will not be tolerated' mean? Does this CoC come with a set of teeth? Where is it enforceable? I support the intention to avoid creating a way to police peoples' politics, but there is ambiguity here. - Matt.