4 ms·

Stuff like this is what gives CoCs a bad rep, although when implemented well, they can be hugely beneficial to communities.

avhon1 6y ago
A key part of "implemented well" is the interpretation and execution by whoever is in charge. Unfortunately, there isn't really a way to know, or ensure, that a group of people will act in good faith and accordance with a document that they say they adhere to. That seems to have been part of the problem here -- Mr. Howard notes several ways in which the committee acted against their own code. I think this is (part of) why many people are against CoCs. They are a tool that good leadership can use to be better, but a tool that bad leadership does use to be worse.
- wbl 6y ago
  Bad leadership is going to make bad decisions regardless.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    The impact of their decisions however depends on the level of power they wield. A CoC gives them more power to wield.
  - friendlybus 6y ago
    Hence systems that are designed to resist abuse, like some versions of democracy and internal police agencies.
- kemonocode 6y ago
  You can have the most flawlessly written, beautiful and well-meaning CoC, yet it won't do any good if it's interpreted by little despots. I do agree Codes of Conduct are a tool like any other, but it's a tool that I've personally seen being misused so many times, it admittedly starts raising red flags. And if there's something human beings excel at, it's in finding patterns, no matter if they're poorly justified or not. Subconsciously, I'm already avoiding contributing directly to projects with strict CoCs, and it's a bit painful when I do realize it, even if I've never willingly (or unwillingly, by virtue of keeping most communication with maintainers short, polite, straight to the point and erring on the side of caution) broken any.
marcinzm 6y ago
As I see it, a CoC is a tool for those in power to better exert their influence and control. If those in power are just and competent then it's a tool for good. If those in power are selfish or unskilled then it's a tool for ill. Unfortunately, I suspect the latter is much more often the case than the former.
- pstuart 6y ago
  > As I see it, a CoC is a tool It's a tool for communicating expectations of behavior. There's nothing wrong about managing expectations. Think of it as the next level "no shoes, no shirt, no service". Unfortunately, tools can be abused, and this case was no exception. It doesn't mean that the tool should be discarded, it should be refined.
  - silly-silly 6y ago
    Except these are "unless you are wearing what someone else doesn't find offensive". This requires a fashion sense that keeps 100% of people happy enough not to report you.
    - pstuart 6y ago
      > Except these are "unless you are wearing what someone else doesn't find offensive". Interesting. I didn't see that example in the article -- could you cite such an example or are you just making something up?
      - silly-silly 6y ago
        I'm referring to your use of the dress code. Unlike the clearly written "No shoes, No Shirt - No Service" sign, the "sign" in this case is the relative offensiveness of ones behaviour. You just have to be offensive to "any single person" to trigger the "no service" condition.
        pstuart 6y ago
acituan 6y ago
Citation needed. What is the differential improvement a CoC can provide over a good implementation without a CoC? Code of conducts are not codifying anything mysterious or disputed that a good common sense judgement cannot arrive. On the flip side, a CoCs can give bad implementations a veneer of legitimacy. And whenever humans relinquish their best judgement to an inanimate piece of text written by enthusiastic people, bad things happen. It makes the way to say "It is the policy", "That's what it writes there", "I didn't make the rules" and get away with not taking responsibility for the complexity of adjudicating over human affairs. Law is complicated enough that it took millennia of iterations to arrive its current form and we still have to employ tons of dedicated professionals to apply it while having a reasonable false positive rate. I can't understand the hubris of the author or enforcer of a CoC thinking that they can possibly be just, fair and overall improve the state of things by making and using their own piece of text at the expense of good human judgement.
zajio1am 6y ago
> when implemented well, they can be hugely beneficial to communities. Does anyone have them implemented well? CoC enforcement is punishment-based social structure and like other such structures (e.g. law enforcement) it is a terrible weapon that requires proper counterbalances to not end as a tool of oppressive tyranny. Society developed such counterbalances for thousands of years so we ended with current rights of accused for fair trial. Unfortunately people who reinvent these social wheels (as CoC) often reinvent them poorly, with much emphasis on punishment and minimal emphasis on rights of accused.
6nf 6y ago
> when implemented well, they can be hugely beneficial to communities. Please supply an example or two if you don't mind?

avhon1 6y ago

A key part of "implemented well" is the interpretation and execution by whoever is in charge. Unfortunately, there isn't really a way to know, or ensure, that a group of people will act in good faith and accordance with a document that they say they adhere to. That seems to have been part of the problem here -- Mr. Howard notes several ways in which the committee acted against their own code. I think this is (part of) why many people are against CoCs. They are a tool that good leadership can use to be better, but a tool that bad leadership does use to be worse.

wbl 6y ago
Bad leadership is going to make bad decisions regardless.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  The impact of their decisions however depends on the level of power they wield. A CoC gives them more power to wield.
- friendlybus 6y ago
  Hence systems that are designed to resist abuse, like some versions of democracy and internal police agencies.
kemonocode 6y ago
You can have the most flawlessly written, beautiful and well-meaning CoC, yet it won't do any good if it's interpreted by little despots. I do agree Codes of Conduct are a tool like any other, but it's a tool that I've personally seen being misused so many times, it admittedly starts raising red flags. And if there's something human beings excel at, it's in finding patterns, no matter if they're poorly justified or not. Subconsciously, I'm already avoiding contributing directly to projects with strict CoCs, and it's a bit painful when I do realize it, even if I've never willingly (or unwillingly, by virtue of keeping most communication with maintainers short, polite, straight to the point and erring on the side of caution) broken any.

marcinzm 6y ago

As I see it, a CoC is a tool for those in power to better exert their influence and control. If those in power are just and competent then it's a tool for good. If those in power are selfish or unskilled then it's a tool for ill. Unfortunately, I suspect the latter is much more often the case than the former.

pstuart 6y ago
> As I see it, a CoC is a tool It's a tool for communicating expectations of behavior. There's nothing wrong about managing expectations. Think of it as the next level "no shoes, no shirt, no service". Unfortunately, tools can be abused, and this case was no exception. It doesn't mean that the tool should be discarded, it should be refined.
- silly-silly 6y ago
  Except these are "unless you are wearing what someone else doesn't find offensive". This requires a fashion sense that keeps 100% of people happy enough not to report you.
  - pstuart 6y ago
    > Except these are "unless you are wearing what someone else doesn't find offensive". Interesting. I didn't see that example in the article -- could you cite such an example or are you just making something up?
    - silly-silly 6y ago
      I'm referring to your use of the dress code. Unlike the clearly written "No shoes, No Shirt - No Service" sign, the "sign" in this case is the relative offensiveness of ones behaviour. You just have to be offensive to "any single person" to trigger the "no service" condition.
      - pstuart 6y ago

acituan 6y ago

Citation needed. What is the differential improvement a CoC can provide over a good implementation without a CoC? Code of conducts are not codifying anything mysterious or disputed that a good common sense judgement cannot arrive. On the flip side, a CoCs can give bad implementations a veneer of legitimacy. And whenever humans relinquish their best judgement to an inanimate piece of text written by enthusiastic people, bad things happen. It makes the way to say "It is the policy", "That's what it writes there", "I didn't make the rules" and get away with not taking responsibility for the complexity of adjudicating over human affairs. Law is complicated enough that it took millennia of iterations to arrive its current form and we still have to employ tons of dedicated professionals to apply it while having a reasonable false positive rate. I can't understand the hubris of the author or enforcer of a CoC thinking that they can possibly be just, fair and overall improve the state of things by making and using their own piece of text at the expense of good human judgement.

zajio1am 6y ago

> when implemented well, they can be hugely beneficial to communities. Does anyone have them implemented well? CoC enforcement is punishment-based social structure and like other such structures (e.g. law enforcement) it is a terrible weapon that requires proper counterbalances to not end as a tool of oppressive tyranny. Society developed such counterbalances for thousands of years so we ended with current rights of accused for fair trial. Unfortunately people who reinvent these social wheels (as CoC) often reinvent them poorly, with much emphasis on punishment and minimal emphasis on rights of accused.

6nf 6y ago

> when implemented well, they can be hugely beneficial to communities. Please supply an example or two if you don't mind?