Issue #12004 has been updated by ph ph.


David Celis wrote:
> Robert Klemme wrote:
> > Folks,
> > 
> > I guess by now all the arguments have been presented already.  I'll just post in case someone wants to draw a statistic from this comment thread and give my perspective.
> > 
> > Coraline Ada Ehmke wrote:
> > 
> > > My suggestion to adopt the Contributor Covenant was a first step. Ideally each community starts with something like this and evolves and shapes it to suit their particular needs.
> > 
> > Please don't.  This will almost inevitably draw some people to spend time and time again "improving" the wording of the CoC.  With this discussion (currently at 300+ comments!) we can see the effect already: people spend time discussing a document rather than actually being nice to each other and given those appropriate feedback that are not nice.
> > 
> > > What's important in this process however is that people who might otherwise feel excluded from certain open source communities be involved in shaping the final code of conduct.
> > 
> > This means that people who might feel excluded must be given chance to work on the CoC while for all others it is optional.
> > 
> > Please do not get me wrong: I am sympathetic of the goal to give more people a chance to contribute that for whatever reason do not do it today.  But I object installint a CoC for a number of reasons:
> > 
> > * I do not see that we actually have an issue with "non niceness".
> 
> Not seeing a problem doesn't mean it's not there. I feel that many comments made in this thread show "non niceness". But like myself and others have said, this is not about "non niceness", this is about an avenue to dealing with real harassment if and when it happens.
> 

The problem that you are raising, which might exist in your society, is not universal. 
Not every society works like yours. Some problems of your zannen society only generate disbelief.
The world is diverse, and your strength and limitation are not everyone's.
You would be greatly inspired to respect this diversity and acknowledge it instead of presuming 
everyone should be protected of problems which are fundamentally yours.
It takes some humility to recognize it but that also opens up a better understanding of 
the world.


Should you feel like it is a real problem in your society, it would be a first step to tackle it 
at the appropriate level and not in some obscure technical circle. Indeed the point you are
 raising has nothing to do with Ruby.

People going to non-ruby conferences, people not going to conference at all, they should 
also not be subjected to harassment. If you are humble enough, you will recognize that this
 thought of yours is not original and new.  That's why civilized societies organized 
themselves around a code of conduct which they call a law.

This idea of having a law is a very old one, and went through many reforms as it is not easy
to have the necessary checks and bounds. It would be very presumptuous, on top of being
illegal, to imagine that you can pretend to have such balance in place on your own at 
a worldwide scale, and reconcile what is non-acceptable here with what is completely normal
there.



> > * Some people seem to believe that having a CoC solves issues - which is nonsense of course.
> 
> It's not nonsense. I have seen CoCs solve issues. The Portland Ruby community has a code of conduct and it hasn't had to be used often, but it has been used to solve several issues that community members have come to us with.
> 

Then by all means, have a Code Of Conduct if you feel like the population of Portland need one.
But those concerns talks about this population and it has nothing to do with the technical
concerns of a programming language, especially used worldwide.


You should again realize that this place you are describing is very specific and the situation
of : an english colony, having replaced natives, with a history of slavery, in needs of communicating
how nice they are, while having no intention of giving back the stolen territory, is a very 
specific situation. Most of the world out there does not experience any of this.
Most of the word does not have this dire need to send out there some message about how
good they are.



> > * I have the impression that some expect a CoC ensures maximum happiness of all community members.  This will never happen as conflicts are human.
> 
> This isn't about ensuring maximum happiness. Again, it's about having a documented way of what we feel constitutes real harassment and how to deal with it when it occurs.
> 

Documenting it means giving the instruction manual to deranged minds on how to abuse it.
Quite the opposite, it is essential, should you want to really foster a good spirit, you would keep
a technical realm technical and oriented toward technic and nothing else.

But abuse is precisely what is looked after here, and the reason why this first step is played out.

May be some kind of compromise will be reached giving the power to Matz in front of a moderate 
pushback, but make no mistake, this is a first step before a 2nd, a 3rd and eventually a control.
Every step will be made in the name of some good cause. once for this. once for that.
Each step will actually be motivated by an ulterior motive.



> > * A CoC will encourage some bad, unnecessary or unwanted behaviors:
> >   * judging and policing of others pointing to the "law"
> >   * spending time on working on the CoC
> >   * even founding a CoC Committee
> >   * debating interpretation of particular rules (while creating the CoC, but also later on)
> 
> Nobody is going to be judging or policing. People just wanna be a part of Ruby without being afraid to show themselves for who they are.
> 


Some people just saw that people are manipulable, good hearted, well meaning, and decided to abuse of it
to foster their political agenda. 


> > * We are grown ups and every grown up should know how to behave.  Those who are not, will remove themselves from the community by their behavior or be removed by the community - regardless whether a CoC exists or not.
> 
> Being a grownup doesn't mean one knows how to behave. 

The grown up have already made laws. As a citizen you can vote for them.
As a ruby programmer, you have nothing to say about what it means to be a grown up or not. 
You are confused and mixing genres. 

If we follow your twisted direction, why not have the Senate vote on evolution of the Ruby language ?


> And while yes, a CoC is not required to remove people from the community for awful behavior, it is important to be able to state why someone was removed and why that behavior was awful. It's also important to state how someone could be welcomed back if they choose to work hard at returning.
> 

Awful behavior .. like trying to impose something that Ruby has nothing to do with ?
Awful behavior .. like having the prevention of being morally qualified to punish people ?
Or like bringing your political ideas to some technical project ?



> > * I do not support the goal of featherbedding everybody.  There are too many people insulted by peanuts that make noise or even harm others.  People need to learn (again) that life also has its harsh sides and nobody is entitled a first row seat in heaven.
> 
> This isn't about a first row seat in heaven, either. This is about literally _basic_ human rights to participate in this public space without being harassed.
> 

For once you are right. This is about _basic_ things. 
So _basic_ that it's kind of not at all the mission of some programming language to deal with it.
So _basic_ that  it has already been taken care of in a legislative framework.
It would be a great service to everyone if you could recognize this _basic_ fact

> > * I very much prefer the Buddhist approach to define the noble goal ("reduce suffering") and leave it to the individual's responsibility to do the needful in every situation than other religious approaches which give detailed rules ("here are the rules, this is forbidden, this is allowed") which tend to be applied thoughtlessly across the board.
> 
> Individuals don't tend to take action when they're in a group unless they're pointed to and told, "Hey we need you to do this thing." A CoC makes folks more likely to speak out when they see bad behavior.
> 

I am sure all the people who contributed to making Ruby will appreciate the fact that they "did not take action"
No doubt they were waiting for you to come and tell them what to do.
Or do you mean Ruby is a negligible outcome ? 

Or are you talking of something completely different than Ruby ?
Then dont argue of things irrelevant to Ruby on bugs.ruby-lang.org 




> > If someone needs a negative example you can look at what is happening at US university campuses currently (search for keywords "trigger warning" and "microagression").  There are a lot of people under way with very good intentions but in the process they loose completely sight of the right measure with negative consequences for freedom of speech and even some individuals who have lost their jobs because of peanuts.
> 
> I justI can't even. I think my other responses are enough.


You know just don't. it's ok.

----------------------------------------
Misc #12004: Code of Conduct
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#change-56583

* Author: Coraline Ada Ehmke
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
----------------------------------------
I am the creator of the Contributor Covenant, a code of conduct for Open Source projects. At last count there are over 13,000 projects on Github that have adopted it. This past year saw adoption of Contributor Covenant by a lot of very large, very visible projects, including Rails, Github's Atom text editor, Angular JS, bundler, curl, diaspora, discourse, Eclipse, rspec, shoes, and rvm. The bundler team made code of conduct integration an option in the gem creation workflow, putting it on par with license selection. Many open source language communities have already adopted the code of conduct, including Elixir, Mono, the .NET foundation, F#, and Apple's Swift. RubyTogether also adopted a policy to only fund Ruby projects that had a solid code of conduct in place.

Right now in the PHP community there is a healthy debate about adopting the Contributor Covenant. Since it came from and has been so widely adopted by the Ruby community at large, I think it's time that we consider adopting it for the core Ruby language as well.

Our community prides itself on niceness. What a code of conduct does is define what we mean by nice. It states clearly that we value openness, courtesy, and compassion. That we care about and want contributions from people who may be different from us. That we pledge to respect all contributors regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, or other factors. And it makes it clear that we are prepared to follow through on these values with action when and if an incident arises.

I'm asking that we join with the larger Ruby community in supporting the adoption of the Contributor Covenant for the Ruby language. I think that this will be an important step forward and will ensure the continued welcoming and supportive environment around Ruby. You can read the full text of the Contributor Covenant at http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/3/0/ and learn more at http://contributor-covenant.org/. 

Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.


---Files--------------------------------
Screen Shot 2016-01-22 at 6.45.23 PM.png (595 KB)
Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Numbers.png (119 KB)
Ruby_Code_of_Conduct_Discussion.png (143 KB)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>