Chuck:

C4.1 contains a poorly-specified, but *real* code of conduct:

Administrators SHOULD block or ban "bad actors" who cause stress and pain
> to others in the project. This should be done after public discussion, with
> a chance for all parties to speak. A bad actor is someone who repeatedly
> ignores the rules and culture of the project, who is needlessly
> argumentative or hostile, or who is offensive, and who is unable to
> self-correct their behavior when asked to do so by others


The “rules and culture” of the project do not appear to be written, at
least there, but they are guidelines toward participation. (It would be
better if they were written.)

C4.1 is also a really good document overall. With changes to reflect Ruby’s
nature, licensing, etc. (plus a bit to specify some of Ruby’s “rules and
culture”), it would probably be a good option here.

However, the mass adoption of CoCs by projects has only started over the
last year or so; push for this data next year. I suspect that 0mq didn’t
see an immediate pick-up, but saw it as a result of (1) application of C4.1
and (2) outreach. I don’t know since I’m not part of that community.

As I have said earlier in this thread, I am not *that* interested in the
data myself. Sometimes there is a clear “right” and “wrong”, and I see
having *some* CoC that makes one’s stance on harassment clear as a clear
“right”.

-a

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:58 AM, <git / chuckremes.com> wrote:

> Issue #12004 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
>
>
> In #371, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene listed several projects that have adopted
> the CoC and asked if any of the feared downsides of a CoC have arisen. I
> think we should ask an opposite question. Have any of those projects seen
> an *increase* in participation? Have any marginalized peoples suddenly
> joined the community and contributed (via code, bug reports, documentation,
> etc)? And if there is an increase, is it statistically measurable on an
> on-going basis or just a one-off?
>
> I'm too lazy to do the work to prove this out one way or the other, but
> then again the burden of proof to adopt a CoC is on its proponents. They
> should do the work to prove a CoC's value *particularly* since it will
> create more work for the core team.
>
> I'm going to go on a short tangent. I am a long time member of the Zeromq
> community. Several years ago there was a falling out between two core
> contributors and one of them ended up leaving the project (to start XS and
> Nano projects). The arguments and split were handled very well without any
> CoC in place at all.
>
> The core contributor learned quite a bit from that experience. He ended up
> devising a new process for contributors and community participants. After
> some evolution, he made a nice post on it and calls it the C4.1 process.
> See here for details:  http://hintjens.com/blog:93
>
> Furthermore, his efforts to grow the community were wildly successful. The
> community absolutely exploded in the months following the personnel change.
> Code contributions and bug reports came from a whole group of new people
> who had never participated before because the guideline (NOT a CoC) lowered
> the barriers for participation. The community was vibrant before the
> project fork but afterwards it was vibrant X 10.
>
> This community renewal all occurred without a CoC.
>
> It could be argued that the Ruby community is already stronger than the
> zeromq community but it could always be stronger. Perhaps it should look to
> the C4.1 process as a potential way for improving interest and
> participation?
>
> At minimum, the CoC proponents should *prove* via some metric (community
> participation, more/better PRs, bug reports, etc) that adopting a CoC will
> benefit this project. So far it just sounds like more work for Core.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Misc #12004: Code of Conduct
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#change-56710
>
> * 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>
>



-- 
Austin Ziegler  halostatue / gmail.com  austin / halostatue.ca
http://www.halostatue.ca/  http://twitter.com/halostatue
(supressed text/html)
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>