Issue #12004 has been updated by Tomek Mako.


I've noticed new accounts can register again, so I guess I'll add my two cents.

I understand the need for CoCs - the Internet is a place where no matter how
much you wish, you can't expect all people to act nice. It is quite unfortunate,
considering what the Ruby motto is, but that's just how it is when you give
people anonimity and freedom from repercussions.

A CoC can serve as guidelines on how to consistently deal with arseholes
you will invariably meet on the Internet. It's good to be able to say "our
rules are thus and we that's how we will deal with those that break them"
because if the rules are written down and consistently enforced, then no-one
can plead the arbitary treatment card.
And that's good - if you can tell people this is how we will act in case
something bad happens they will feel safer and more confident in leadership.
This also fosters atmosphere that's conductive to people just learning to
program - if you can feel welcome, then it's certainly easier to start
asking questions and learning.

Maybe the reason that Ruby core has so far have steered clear of those issues
is  because it stands a bit apart from the mainstream international Rails
community which is the biggest strand of Rubyists currently.
Maybe language and cultural barriers played some part in it (I, for one, would
be somewhat discouraged to report Ruby core issues because I neither know
Japanese enough to communicate in it, nor would I be 100% sure I can get the
message across unambiguosly in English that's understandable to all Japanese
contributors).
Maybe it's because the issues are to be reported in redmine and not github
(something like this can be observed in Clojure to - their use of JIRA dissuades
people from reporting issues and writing patches somewhat in my opinion).

Thus Matsumoto-san feels there's little need for a CoC - this little peaceful
community experienced none of the issues the wider international programming
communities face due to it's small size. That's true but it is also no reason
to not adopt a guidelines on how to deal with bad actors - a CoC as it were.

That said I too, as some in this issue, am afraid of the potential of abuse of
a CoC. And not just FUD-ishly afraid, but afraid due to legitimate reasons.

Consider for example - already mentioned in this thread - the case of the Opal
contributor Elia Schito.
Coraline (the OP of this issue) learned of his discussion with someone
re: transpeople issues and took offence to his views even though they were not
directed at her. She then decided to take the issue with the fact that he is
one of primary contributors to Opal and demanded his removal from the project
(https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941).
He neither attacked her personally nor harrased her, yet she decided it is
within her rights to oust him from a project she didn't even contribute to.
Because what, he is a catholic christian and has opinions on certain topics
that are in line with his faith? Did he ever bring those issues into
discuession about Opal? No. Coraline brought his discussion on issues not
related into Opal to the project, and demanded him removed. She did even bring
a brigade of her friends, including our dear bigoted friend Kurtis
Rainbolt-Greene to campaign for removing Elia.
Had he been doing it in the scope of project communications?
Surely, that would be something to take umbrage to, bringing unrelated politics
into discussion about merit of code, issues, pull requests and whatnot.
But he didn't - it was Coraline that brought her politics into a project she
possibly didn't even use (or at least didn't contribute to) with explicit aim
of removing a person she didn't like.
Yes, I understand that such subject might be personal and touchy to a
transperson, because as I am led to believe (I don't have any friends of that
persuasion that could attest that to me personally) their lives are tough
because they are different, but going out of her way to punish someone who
bore her specifically no ill will?
To me this is entirely unacceptable.

I also would like to highlight this bit of hypocrisy:
Our dear bigoted friend Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene is in favour of Coraline's CoC,
just like he was for removal of Elia and introduction of CoC to Opal.
Let's then see how Coraline's CoC would apply to him, shall we?
Observe this tweet - https://archive.is/TjFtG - quoted here for convenience:

> And frankly, as @yukihiro_matz has stated he doesn't feel like being
> responsible for helping people feel safe then fuck his leadership.

Let's see, that could be classified (using Contributor Covenant 1.3.0) as:

* `Personal attacks`
* `Trolling or insulting/derogatory comments`
* `Other unethical or unprofessional conduct`

and he can be quite reasonably construed as `representing the project or its
community` in `public spaces` since he seems - by his admission at least - to
be a maintainer of vcr, hamster, and rubygems.
Yet he seems to push for CoC as if it didn't concern him. Why? Does he feel
he's allowed to act against the CoC he promotes because he has the privilege
of having the right politics and friends? Does he except his inexcusable
behaviour to be excused?
I don't think such people should be in charge of proposing and/or enforcing
CoCs if they think their right politics make them above the laws they want to
instate. Because just as soon it would stop being a tool to deal with real
arseholes in a community, but to a weapon to bar people they deem unpersons
from projects.

Therefore I humbly submit to Matsumoto-san and the Ruby core to look at any
proposed code of conduct from this perspective - it is something you need to
fall back to when passing judgement, so that people can feel there are solid
rules for handling bad actors in the community they can rely on when something
bad happens, BUT it also need to be written in a way that protects the
integrity of the project from people like Kurtis or Coraline that only wish
to punish those, whot think differently than them, even outside the project.
Thus I think Contributor Covenant shouldn't qualify, at least not if the
clause about behaviour external to the project is modified.

I come from a country where I have seen things like this used for the last
8 years to discredit the political opposition by the ruling party, painting
half of the country with broad strokes as enemies of democracy. In the end
people have seen through that and voted them out both from the parliament and
from the presidency - and that happened a post-soviet country where propaganda
machine like that should've been blindingly obvious. So I just feel compelled
to point out what I see here as just that, because I'm not eager to see Ruby
torn apart.

In my opinion PostgreSQL CoC sounds likes something that would be a perfect
fit - both laying out the guidelines for behaviour and handling of bad actors,
but at the same time guarding the integrity of the project - but of course I
understand that the final decision lies with Matsumoto-san and the core team.

I just hope that the Ruby project won't be worse off due to the choice.
While I may have mostly moved to Clojure now, I've been coding Ruby for almost
five years (so yeah, good job pulling that rando card) and I can confidently
say that - while I don't think I will want to come back to imperative, mutable,
object-oriented programming - Ruby is the best and most pleasant OO language I
have ever programmed in and Rails is a great framework for fast website
prototyping built on top of it - and thank you a lot Matsumoto-san for having
invented it. If you didn't I would probably have had  to become a Java
programmer D :

I hope Ruby core will make the best possible decision to not squander all that,
but to make it continue thriving.

пу
DISCLAIMERS:
Oh, and before Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene feels he needs to pull the GG card as is
his usual deflective ad hominem style - yes, I read r/KotakuInAction (and came
to a conclusion that they are not the hate mob everyone purports them to be,
just the usual kind of Internet crude) and I have posted there a couple of
times, once even  to annoy our dear bigoted friend because he seems to troll
KiA from time to time being his usual bigoted self.

If I formatted something wrong then sorry - first time using redmine.

----------------------------------------
Misc #12004: Code of Conduct
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12004#change-56773

* 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>