Django adopts a Code of Conduct
djangoproject.com
djangoproject.com
I'm really interested because - All I've seen over the years is that a community has toxic people in them and it's either because of their actions or (funnily enough) because of their initiative that a CoC gets drafted and put in place. Afterwards, these toxic people now see themselves in charge of upholding the CoC and you get a neat little mall cop situation.
It depends on the CoC, of course, but in my experience the actual details only change the rate of decline in community quality. If it does end up getting better, it's often in spite of the CoC, not because of it.
Inevitably, people who aren't as anal about the rules find themselves pushed out of the community by sheer frustration over being policed by the mall cops. More often than not, the people who are pushed out happen to be the more productive members of the community (in other areas than policing).
I had an experience where I was policed for using the "highly offensive dictionary ``complete cock´´". Not towards a person, just as a general expression. I was so astonished, I had to make a screenshot. It marked the beginning of the end of my participation in that particular forum.
A year later, another developer was pushed out of the community for using the word "pussy". As in: "I decided I will finish this code tonight instead of being a pussy." Fun times.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/women2/2013/04/09/record-number-...
clearly you can play the "correlation is not causation" card here but anecdotal evidence of "harm" done by a CoC isn't any better.
Also, the CoC's we're talking about here wouldn't eject someone for using the word "pussy". if anything, it would protect this person as the CoC would call for an appropriate reaction, instead of an off-the-cuff overreaction.
The "spawn" here was the internet.
However, it's sorta irrelevant here: we're not expecting this to really change much of anything, and we don't think the community needs improving. Like the FAQ says, "we know that the Django community is open, friendly, and welcoming. We want to make sure everyone else knows it too." The goal here is to articulate and write down the standards that we already basically follow but have been (until now) unwritten.
In fact, if you're worried about having the book thrown at you, you should be happy about this change. Before today, if I thought you were being a jerk, I could throw you off IRC or the mailing list or whatever and that was that. I was, until a few hours ago, essentially sole arbiter of standards in the Django community, and those standards were ones that basically lived in my head until earlier this year.
Now, those standards are written down, and there's a process and some oversight to make sure I don't unilaterally decide someone's worth hitting with the ban-hammer.
So really, if you're honestly concerned about being people ousted for violated community policies, this sort of documentation and process should make you feel more comfortable, not less. We're replacing a BDFL-ship with open documentation, a committee, and organizational oversight.
I do think there are inherent problems with a CoC. You state that the rules probably won't change anything and I agree with that. I think that shows the power of an implicit agreement of conduct. Because even if a CoC tries to inform that, I remain unconvinced that it can.
I suppose mostly what I have a problem with is the concept of expectation itself. A CoC is a lightning rod that is cited when people feel wronged. You sort of turn that around by saying that I might feel safer with explicit rules, but I could just as well argue that the more explicit the rules are, the more suspect they are to being misused or misinterpreted. Because what they do is create the explicit expectation that they will be upheld. What part of them and in what manner is subject to interpretation and those "toxic" people are usually quite inventive when it comes to finding such transgressions. Managing expectations like that can be a very tricky thing.
I might be biased by my experience here, but I've just seen a little too often how making conduct a high ranking concern can create a vacuum that attracts politics.
In the end, I'm quite certain that you are right with the beginning of your second paragraph. Although I would still say - If it's not needed and it won't change anything, then why have it? (And yes, I read your FAQ, so feel free to ignore this question ;-) )
Basically the alternative to writing a code of conduct isn't not to have one, it's for it to be implicit and undocumented. Put another way: we've been moderating #django and other forums for a while, it's not fair that the rules for that were in our heads, and not on paper (bytes).
It's interesting to me that you seem so angry about a group that's trying to bring more people into tech. What are you worried about, exactly?
Most of the women I know in tech loathe these sorts of concern-trolls for giving feminists erroneous reputations of being hard to work with.
Also, who's angry? I just think it's stupid to engage with such destructive people, but then again I don't participate in the Django community in any way so it doesn't affect me one way or the other.
Also, giving them credence and strengthening their brand serves to help them undermine actual equality in our industry, but, again, I'm male, so it doesn't directly affect me. It's still stupid, though.
This type of feminist, and the ada group are known for this kind of behaviour specifically, are wont to turn on their own :
http://violetblue.tumblr.com/post/44107008572/what-happened-... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/i-am-not-your-enemy-an-o...
It's an "explicit is better than implicit" kinda of thing!
The items under the "Be careful in the words that you choose" heading (which make up a significant part of the document), except for maybe the doxing clause, addresses an apparently antisocial audience, which is patronizing.
And what I mean by CYA-ish, is that the intent of the code seems to be to prevent worst-case scenarios. Whereas the HN and Hacker School guidelines aim to boost the level of discourse and friendliness, the Django code offers suggestions on how to avoid getting arrested.
btw - I like the intent of "When we disagree, try to understand why." This does seem to run against the internet grain of, "When in doubt, repeat yourself, and if needed GO ALL CAPS"