4 ms·

> If someone is behaving poorly, first of all, a CoC will not deter them. I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You're treating humanity as if it's divided int

> If someone is behaving poorly, first of all, a CoC will not deter them. I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You're treating humanity as if it's divided into two distinct sections: Those Who Behave Well, and Those Who Behave Poorly. In reality, different humans have different ranges of ways they prefer to act, and most are quite amenable to reasonable, clearly-stated codes of conduct for interaction in a particular space. There is a small subset of people who are either deliberately antisocial for the sake of it (trolls/griefers/etc), and another subset that are genuinely just assholes who will, if given the leeway to do so, cause endless problems in a community. But there are many, many more who would cause friction with others in such a community without a code of conduct not because they actively want to, but because their unstated assumptions about how people should interact clash with the unstated assumptions of other people there. Having the code of conduct lets everyone coming in in good faith align their expectations and avoid these unnecessary conflicts. They're like a Session 0 in a TTRPG in that sense.

ranger_danger 1y ago
> But there are many, many more who would cause friction with others in such a community without a code of conduct Hard disagree... I've never seen one have this effect. IMO you don't need a CoC to suddenly understand what should already be common sense i.e. don't be a dick. Either they were already going to act that way, or they weren't.
- danaris 1y ago
  > I've never seen one have this effect. How do you think you would see it? Under normal circumstances, what it would look like from the outside is just...someone not causing friction, because there is a code of conduct. Or someone causing friction, because there isn't one. The former looks identical to someone who would never have caused trouble in the first place, and the latter looks, if not identical, at least very similar to someone who would have caused trouble, no matter what.
  - ranger_danger 1y ago
    The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Another commenter (cannot find their name now but I saved the text) said exactly what my experience has been: > A written code of conduct can legitimize petty disputes based on interpretations of the text, even if the issue itself is something easily addressable like using the word “master” in a programming context. It can become a tool for manipulation (pushing someone out for “CoC violation” vs simply correcting the wording).
    - danaris 1y ago
      > The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. > And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Both correct. By definition, in fact. CoCs are for the people in the middle of those. Who do, in fact, exist.
      - ranger_danger 1y ago
        I think if someone needs to be told to be nice... it's time to grow up. Open source projects are not your mother and we shouldn't have to treat people like children, nor get chastised for having that (IMO very reasonable) stance.
        danaris 1y ago
        It's not about being "told to be nice". It's about setting a shared understanding of norms. It's about whether the kinds of jokes allowed among members are "as raunchy as you please", "polite jokes only," or "none". It's about whether you're expected to work out differences in private chats, address them in public, or bring them to a moderator. It's about whether your comments on a code review started by another member have to be addressed by the committer before the review can go forward. Any time you think the way you do things in the open source project (or any other kind of community) you contribute to or run is The Natural, Obvious Way Everyone Does Things, you're probably wrong, and some other people or projects do things exactly the opposite way and think that's just as natural and obvious.

ranger_danger 1y ago

> But there are many, many more who would cause friction with others in such a community without a code of conduct Hard disagree... I've never seen one have this effect. IMO you don't need a CoC to suddenly understand what should already be common sense i.e. don't be a dick. Either they were already going to act that way, or they weren't.

danaris 1y ago
> I've never seen one have this effect. How do you think you would see it? Under normal circumstances, what it would look like from the outside is just...someone not causing friction, because there is a code of conduct. Or someone causing friction, because there isn't one. The former looks identical to someone who would never have caused trouble in the first place, and the latter looks, if not identical, at least very similar to someone who would have caused trouble, no matter what.
- ranger_danger 1y ago
  The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Another commenter (cannot find their name now but I saved the text) said exactly what my experience has been: > A written code of conduct can legitimize petty disputes based on interpretations of the text, even if the issue itself is something easily addressable like using the word “master” in a programming context. It can become a tool for manipulation (pushing someone out for “CoC violation” vs simply correcting the wording).
  - danaris 1y ago
    > The way I see it, the people who would cause friction anyway won't be stopped by a CoC. > And the people who wouldn't cause friction are already behaving so they don't need one. Both correct. By definition, in fact. CoCs are for the people in the middle of those. Who do, in fact, exist.
    - ranger_danger 1y ago
      I think if someone needs to be told to be nice... it's time to grow up. Open source projects are not your mother and we shouldn't have to treat people like children, nor get chastised for having that (IMO very reasonable) stance.
      - danaris 1y ago
        It's not about being "told to be nice". It's about setting a shared understanding of norms. It's about whether the kinds of jokes allowed among members are "as raunchy as you please", "polite jokes only," or "none". It's about whether you're expected to work out differences in private chats, address them in public, or bring them to a moderator. It's about whether your comments on a code review started by another member have to be addressed by the committer before the review can go forward. Any time you think the way you do things in the open source project (or any other kind of community) you contribute to or run is The Natural, Obvious Way Everyone Does Things, you're probably wrong, and some other people or projects do things exactly the opposite way and think that's just as natural and obvious.