Code of conduct revision #11
Conversation
Also includes proposed procedures for report and enforcement of the CoC. Based on the following Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cj9trFifGNqyNtpyEO9FfJLlmDGTbUy5enRAA9rTyH4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.214z66dv3mpo.
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
|
||
| [Reference](#reference) | ||
|
|
||
| ## Code of Conduct {#coc} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Style point: These {#anchor}s are being shown but not linked. This does not seem to be a part of GitHub-flavored markdown.
There is an outline available on all Markdown documents by clicking the button in the top right of the page:
|
|
||
| ### Follow up with the reporter {#follow-up-with-the-reporter} | ||
|
|
||
| A person who makes a report should receive a follow-up email stating what action was taken in response to the report. If the work group decided no response was needed, they should provide an email explaining why it was not a Code of Conduct violation. Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| A person who makes a report should receive a follow-up email stating what action was taken in response to the report. If the work group decided no response was needed, they should provide an email explaining why it was not a Code of Conduct violation. Reports that are not made in good faith (such as "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism") may receive no response. | |
| A person who makes a report should receive a follow-up email stating what action was taken in response to the report. If the work group decided no response was needed, they should provide an email explaining why it was not a Code of Conduct violation. Reports that are determined not to have been made in good faith may receive no response. |
I really don't think it's a good idea to pick two particular positions to represent bad faith reports. These phrases have particular meanings in American political discourse, but that meaning may not be shared by people of all international backgrounds or people who have not had their ear to the ground in the last decade or so.
I think stating that the group has discretion to determine bad faith or disparate impact ("Impact" section above) is sufficient to cover these cases without inviting debate over what these terms mean, which debate could itself turn into CoC violations.
Also includes proposed procedures for report and enforcement of the CoC.
Based on the following Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cj9trFifGNqyNtpyEO9FfJLlmDGTbUy5enRAA9rTyH4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.214z66dv3mpo.
As this still includes portions that need to be filled out and some issues that need to be ironed out (e.g., retention of records about enforcement actions), this is still considered a draft.