5 ms·

I think projects underestimate how off-putting Code of Conducts are. I won't touch projects with a CoC, and when a project that I'm actively contributing

I think projects underestimate how off-putting Code of Conducts are. I won't touch projects with a CoC, and when a project that I'm actively contributing to introduces a CoC, I stop contributing. These days I try not to contribute to any project that doesn't have a CoC. The project I help maintain does, as do the communities I moderate. If someone can't create a PR without saying things that are racist, misogynist, etc. then frankly I don't want them in my community. If someone is going to be put off by the fact that mightn't be able to say something hateful if they decided they wanted to, then I'd rather not have that person in my community. Giving people who are obsessed with political correctness a leg to stand on can be damaging to a community, and trying to placating such people via a CoC is a lost cause. I think that's a very negative way of looking at a CoC. Where you see "people who are obsessed with political correctness", I see "people who are tired of being constantly shit on by the vocal jerks in online communities". It's not placating, it's simply valuing people's right to contribute and participate peacefully over other people's right to be jackasses. Sure, you can do that without a CoC, but the CoC is a good signal to people that the people who are moderating the community are on their side. On the flip side, I've never seen harassment tolerated even without a CoC. I don't think CoC deter such people anyway. So IMO there is simply no upside. I disagree with the assertion that CoCs don't deter people in a community; I have seen first-hand where having a code of conduct was a way of resolving something that was quickly getting out hand and was likely to have ended up with some great contributors leaving the project because they were being harassed by others. I wasn't going to convince the harassers that they were wrong about what they were saying, and I certainly wasn't going to convince the people being harassed that they should stick around in a community that was being hostile. Most people were either unaware of the threat, or else not directly affected and stayed quiet. The CoC was something of a final arbiter to put a stop to the harassment, and I had tried diligently to do so before putting on my admin hat or pulling out the CoC. I've seen many other situations where similar things have played out. Without CoCs people would have either been banned from the project, or others would have left, being able to put a stop to something has helped. Besides, any kind of potential drama is a no-go, I use my Github account for work. If I was younger, I'd probably start over again with a fresh github account that didn't have my real name attached to it. But not contributing seems like an easier solution. If you're neither a maintainer or community moderator, nor violating the CoC, then I don't see where the drama would come in. I have my real name attached to my github account, to the meetups I run, and the slack communities I moderate. I deal with CoC violations at times, and certainly my own harassment, but I'm not worried about "drama" effecting my reputation because I stand by my own behaviors and by my belief in the value of not letting people harass others and crate hostile toxic environments.

adekok 10y ago
> If someone can't create a PR without saying things that are racist, misogynist, etc. then frankly I don't want them in my community. That's confusing two issues: code of conduct, and on-topic communication. If someone opens a PR which complains about a bug in a different piece of software, you would close it as off topic. If they kept doing so, you would block them as being abusive. The same should apply to racism, sexism, etc. The issue isn't that they're wrong, it's that they're off topic for a PR. You don't need a code of conduct that says "racism is bad" in (for example) a javascript library. For me, making moral and political statements in a software project raises all kinds of red flags.
- ZoFreX 10y ago
  The problem with this argument is a lot of language communities grow into large communities, and often have lots of discussion areas which are not central to the language topic. E.g. they may have a place to discuss video games, or other languages, or politics. Even if they don't it's not uncommon for people to chat socially during down-time. Unless you're going to outlaw all socialising, the "off-topic" approach doesn't work for large communities.
  - guitarbill 10y ago
    But off-topic discussions in e.g. Github PRs? I don't think it belongs in the code base. If there were such a code, it could be shown/available wherever the discussion is taken place, e.g. forum, mailing list instead.
- acdha 10y ago
  The error you're making is in assuming that those are always clearly separate. There are many examples of people who were talking about on-topic technical concepts but used examples or made “jokes” which were not. Having a clear CoC is simply a shortcut: if, say, a speaker uses a bikini picture in a slide you can simply point to it and say “you broke the CoC” rather than rehashing the nth argument about how much sexualization is acceptable in a technical context. It's like the difference between having a standard license and contributor agreement versus making it up as you go along: more work up front but it avoids problems which become more time-consuming as the number of people involved grows.

adekok 10y ago

> If someone can't create a PR without saying things that are racist, misogynist, etc. then frankly I don't want them in my community. That's confusing two issues: code of conduct, and on-topic communication. If someone opens a PR which complains about a bug in a different piece of software, you would close it as off topic. If they kept doing so, you would block them as being abusive. The same should apply to racism, sexism, etc. The issue isn't that they're wrong, it's that they're off topic for a PR. You don't need a code of conduct that says "racism is bad" in (for example) a javascript library. For me, making moral and political statements in a software project raises all kinds of red flags.

ZoFreX 10y ago
The problem with this argument is a lot of language communities grow into large communities, and often have lots of discussion areas which are not central to the language topic. E.g. they may have a place to discuss video games, or other languages, or politics. Even if they don't it's not uncommon for people to chat socially during down-time. Unless you're going to outlaw all socialising, the "off-topic" approach doesn't work for large communities.
- guitarbill 10y ago
  But off-topic discussions in e.g. Github PRs? I don't think it belongs in the code base. If there were such a code, it could be shown/available wherever the discussion is taken place, e.g. forum, mailing list instead.
acdha 10y ago
The error you're making is in assuming that those are always clearly separate. There are many examples of people who were talking about on-topic technical concepts but used examples or made “jokes” which were not. Having a clear CoC is simply a shortcut: if, say, a speaker uses a bikini picture in a slide you can simply point to it and say “you broke the CoC” rather than rehashing the nth argument about how much sexualization is acceptable in a technical context. It's like the difference between having a standard license and contributor agreement versus making it up as you go along: more work up front but it avoids problems which become more time-consuming as the number of people involved grows.