3 ms·
Much of the conversation here misses the point of CoCs (and org policies in general). I've led 200+ person community orgs and helped put in governance for Fort
by curiousllama 6y ago
Much of the conversation here misses the point of CoCs (and org policies in general). I've led 200+ person community orgs and helped put in governance for Fortune 500s, it's all the same - policies are an exercise in leadership, and are exactly as effective as the leadership in place.
Rules, policies, laws, Hammurabi's Code - they're all just leadership decisions made in advance. The problem here is that the leadership clearly doesn't really care. They got a complaint, they "investigated," and they moved on. Classic "governance" - totally ineffective.
After years, my favorite governance approach is still the one from a college club. It read in it's entirety: "No !ssholes." It makes clear the goal, who will be enforcing, and what to expect: The goal is no !ssholes, I will be enforcing, and I will do so by calling you an !sshole. It's just social pressure - and for anything outside of the judicial or corporate systems, that's all there is anyway.
- therealjumbo 6y ago>Rules, policies, laws, Hammurabi's Code - they're all just leadership decisions made in advance. The problem here is that the leadership clearly doesn't really care. They got a complaint, they "investigated," and they moved on. Classic "governance" - totally ineffective. I definitely don't have the experience you do, but the regular judicial system (in most countries that aren't kafka-esque throughout history) has adversarial parties that are incentivized to find if the other party is wrong. That's very different from all the corporate, university or open source "governance" systems. Maybe they can't bear that additional cost, but it's a huge difference.