WIP: CoC

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical
appearance, body size or race.

I think you meant "free OF comments".

However it still picks a few special classes of complaint, some of
which cause ambiguity such as 'gender'. Does that mean I can't use
"he/she" pronouns? It also implies that i'm allowed to criticize
people in other ways, say, their political affiliation or country.
Rather than list a bunch of "no no" perhaps something like:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On 01/11/2016 02:22 PM, Brian Dunavant wrote:

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical
appearance, body size or race.

I think you meant "free OF comments".

I did.

However it still picks a few special classes of complaint, some of
which cause ambiguity such as 'gender'. Does that mean I can't use
"he/she" pronouns? It also implies that i'm allowed to criticize
people in other ways, say, their political affiliation or country.
Rather than list a bunch of "no no" perhaps something like:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

First, I want to make sure we don't get too far into the weeds here.

I think your example is a good one but I do think we need examples so
perhaps:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

???

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

(Sorry for the dup post. I felt having a clean thread without having to
cross-reference was worth the minor faux pas.)

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

of comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability,
physical appearance,
body size or race.

why not

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

of ad hominem.

I don't see why we need to limit comments like in the original: that's not
the point! The point is that people shouldn't be attacked!

Moreover,

2. The CoC is not about being offended. The act of being offended is

purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is more
interested in being a victim than moving forward.

is very harsh. It definitely needs to be rephrased or built on. What is
the point of this, by the way? If we state that personal attacks are
unbecoming of a member of this group, then does it matter if I'm offended
when someone says we should have a table that lacks 1-M 1-F constraints for
marriage? It's not an attack and trying to clarify the differences between
being offended because of an attack on me or just in general might make
things too awkward to write.

Jim

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
wrote:

Show quoted text

On 01/11/2016 02:22 PM, Brian Dunavant wrote:

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical
appearance, body size or race.

I think you meant "free OF comments".

I did.

However it still picks a few special classes of complaint, some of
which cause ambiguity such as 'gender'. Does that mean I can't use
"he/she" pronouns? It also implies that i'm allowed to criticize
people in other ways, say, their political affiliation or country.
Rather than list a bunch of "no no" perhaps something like:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

First, I want to make sure we don't get too far into the weeds here.

I think your example is a good one but I do think we need examples so
perhaps:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

???

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual orientation,
disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

Between these two I still prefer my wording here because it
encompasses all personal attacks regardless of topic or type and
avoids hot-button words that distract from the point and can be used
for lawyering. It also emphasizes the desired behavior instead, that
criticism should be about the technical merit of the topic. "Don't be
a jerk, and stick to the code." Maybe even rewording it to be a
positive instead of a negative would improve it further.

"A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is one
that focuses on the technical merit of ideas and solutions rather than
on the person behind them."

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On 01/11/2016 02:30 PM, James Keener wrote:

(Sorry for the dup post. I felt having a clean thread without having to
cross-reference was worth the minor faux pas.)

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

of comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical
appearance, body size or race.

why not

3.A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

of ad hominem.

I still think we need the examples which is why I sent this a few
minutes ago:

""" A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race. """

Moreover,

2. The CoC is not about being offended.The act of being offended is

purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is more
interested in being a victim than moving forward.

is very harsh.

So is life. We aren't here to wipe butts and change a diaper. However,
yes I do agree that it is harsh. The point is really in relation to #6,
the CoC is not about Social Justice.

There are people in this community, people I know personally who will
abuse this CoC if it is not exceedingly clear that their ability to be
offended is not relevant.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On 01/11/2016 02:27 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

On 01/11/2016 02:22 PM, Brian Dunavant wrote:

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical
appearance, body size or race.

I think you meant "free OF comments".

I did.

However it still picks a few special classes of complaint, some of
which cause ambiguity such as 'gender'. Does that mean I can't use
"he/she" pronouns? It also implies that i'm allowed to criticize
people in other ways, say, their political affiliation or country.
Rather than list a bunch of "no no" perhaps something like:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

First, I want to make sure we don't get too far into the weeds here.

That is exactly where this is going to go. From a previous example given
as something to emulate:

http://couchdb.apache.org/conduct.html

Diversity Statement

" ... No matter how you identify yourself or how others perceive you: we
welcome you. Though no list can hope to be comprehensive, we explicitly
honour diversity in: age, culture, ethnicity, genotype, gender identity
or expression, language, national origin, neurotype, phenotype,
political beliefs, profession, race, religion, sexual orientation,
socioeconomic status, subculture and technical ability. ..."

You start down this path and you create more and more classifications
and explanations of interactions between classifications, until even the
lawyers beg for mercy. In the end it either turns into a mine field of
unreasonable expectations or folks realize that what they really want
can be encapsulated in, 'Be nice'.

I think your example is a good one but I do think we need examples so
perhaps:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

???

Per your previous post:

"We could add the word inappropriate.." So who decides what is
appropriate or for that matter safe or respectful? Or do we resort to
the Justice Stewart test, to paraphrase, '"I know it when I see it, and
this is not it". In which case we are back to the eye of the beholder.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On 01/11/2016 02:41 PM, Brian Dunavant wrote:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual orientation,
disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

Between these two I still prefer my wording here because it
encompasses all personal attacks regardless of topic or type and
avoids hot-button words that distract from the point and can be used
for lawyering. It also emphasizes the desired behavior instead, that
criticism should be about the technical merit of the topic. "Don't be
a jerk, and stick to the code." Maybe even rewording it to be a
positive instead of a negative would improve it further.

"A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is one
that focuses on the technical merit of ideas and solutions rather than
on the person behind them."

How about we meet in the middle:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or
personal attacks.

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

So is life. We aren't here to wipe butts and change a diaper.

But the original isn't constructive of what to do. If I am attacked personally I will feel offended, the point is what I do about it. Whining about bring offended vs bringing it up and saying that it is not acceptable behaviour are very different.

Worse, the original is nothing more than victim blaming.

Even worse, it's useless as not feeling offence isn't what this is about. What to do when you feel offended is.

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free

of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race
I prefer my or the siblings more positive wording than an explicit negative of the types of personal attacks we don't like. We don't want any personal attacks!

Jim

On January 11, 2016 5:44:56 PM EST, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

On 01/11/2016 02:30 PM, James Keener wrote:

(Sorry for the dup post. I felt having a clean thread without having

to

cross-reference was worth the minor faux pas.)

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is

free

of comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability,

physical

appearance, body size or race.

why not

3.A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is

free

of ad hominem.

I still think we need the examples which is why I sent this a few
minutes ago:

""" A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is
free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race. """

Moreover,

2. The CoC is not about being offended.The act of being offended is

purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is

more

interested in being a victim than moving forward.

is very harsh.

So is life. We aren't here to wipe butts and change a diaper. However,
yes I do agree that it is harsh. The point is really in relation to #6,

the CoC is not about Social Justice.

There are people in this community, people I know personally who will
abuse this CoC if it is not exceedingly clear that their ability to be
offended is not relevant.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

How about we meet in the middle:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or
personal attacks.

That's not really meeting in the middle: it still specifies exactly
one set of disapproved topics. Might be OK if it read like
"... personal comments, for example ones related to gender, ..."

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

2. The CoC is not about being offended. The act of being offended is purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is more interested in being a victim than moving forward.

Here is my latest version. Let me know if I should throw in a github repo so it's easier to read or if you have other plans for a Coc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like the open source technical community as a whole, our community is made up of a mixture of professionals and volunteers with vast differences of opinions and
styles of communication. Our community is made up of people from many cultures and walks of life who have come together
with the common goals of making a great piece of software and helping others use this software.

We value contributions from everybody. By contributions we mean code, documentation, project outreach in form of setting up conferences or working groups,
package maintenance, answering and asking questions in our forums which further our mission, and providing bug reports.

If you have contributed to our project, then we consider you a member
of our extended family and value your opinions and concerns very highly.

We value the opinions of members who have contributed most more than we value the opinions of others.
This is because major contributors have already proved their desire to further our mission, and for newcomers,
their intention has not yet been established.

We want everyone entering our community willing to help out to feel welcomed.

To maintain and encourage a welcoming environment we ask all people interacting with our community to follow these guidelines when in our
public spaces. By public spaces we mean mailing lists, IRC channels, Code repositories, and reporting bug reports

GUIDELINES

1) When in discussions keep focused on the topic being discussed.
2) Say helpful things, and if you feel you have nothing to say that furthers the discussion, say nothing.

By helpful we mean for example:
If someone asks a question, even if it's one that you think has an obvious answer, either provide an example or a link to the section of the manual that covers it.

If you feel a person does not provide enough information for someone to help, point them to this link: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Guide_to_reporting_problems

3) Do not switch the topic to yourself unless the topic happens to be about you.
For example if someone is asking a question about replication, and the words master and slave come up in discussion,
do not talk about the great master/slave sex you had last night.

4) Do not ask questions that are unrelated to the mission of our project.

USE OF TRIGGER TERMS

We have long standing terms like Master/Slave that may trigger some past trauma for some people.
While we do consider people's feelings, we weigh that against the effort of changing long understood terminology and the psychological trauma
such changes would cause for the large majority of people who are not as sensitive to the usage.
As such we entertain change requests for naming of new features more than we do of renaming old features.

HANDLING ISSUES

We understand that through no fault of anybody, a person may make a comment they consider harmless that others find very offensive or makes another feel small. As project maintainers
we will monitor these and gently call people out on them even if they are a member of our maintainer group.

By gentle call out, we mean something like "I think what X was trying to say was that you need to do this" or point them to this document and specific bullet point we feel they violated.

We expect of everyone in our spaces to try their best to do the same in a kind and gentle manner. If you feel it's just a minor offense and the person didn't mean harm by it,
simply ignore it unless the pattern of talk continues.

If anyone is being purposely antagonistic please notify the project maintainer group at ... with the specific occurrence and evidence that made you feel this way.
We will judge if your complaints are valid and if we deem they are valid we will talk with the person to affect a change in their behavior or kick them out if we determine behavior change is not possible.

We do not tolerate those we feel are trying to derail our project by injecting
discussions that have little to do with the mission of our project.
If you have contributed nothing to our project and you make demands for change, we will try to tell you that kindly
and request you to change or leave.

We promise as project maintainers to apply the same standards on ourselves as we apply to others.

Thanks,
Regina

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is one

that focuses on the technical merit of ideas and solutions rather than
on the person behind them.

I still prefer this wording as there is no need for us to list the ways in which someone can personally be attacked. Should the list include relative's weight, religion, aliveness, past follies, jobs &c.

The quote above is sufficiently powerful to allow members of this group to reprimand anyone for stepping out of bounds without having to shoehorn their objection into a very narrow list.

Lists of specific points like this are almost always the wrong way to do something general. Title VI (and policies based on it) includes a list for very specific reasons and we're seeing the issues that brings as that list isn't always inclusive enough.

Jim

On January 11, 2016 5:48:38 PM EST, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

On 01/11/2016 02:41 PM, Brian Dunavant wrote:

"3) A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment

is

free of negative personal criticism directed at a member of a
community, rather than at the technical merit of a topic."

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual

orientation,

disability, physical appearance, body size or race.

Between these two I still prefer my wording here because it
encompasses all personal attacks regardless of topic or type and
avoids hot-button words that distract from the point and can be used
for lawyering. It also emphasizes the desired behavior instead, that
criticism should be about the technical merit of the topic. "Don't

be

a jerk, and stick to the code." Maybe even rewording it to be a
positive instead of a negative would improve it further.

"A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is one
that focuses on the technical merit of ideas and solutions rather

than

on the person behind them."

How about we meet in the middle:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or
personal attacks.

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 01/11/2016 02:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

How about we meet in the middle:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or
personal attacks.

That's not really meeting in the middle: it still specifies exactly
one set of disapproved topics. Might be OK if it read like
"... personal comments, for example ones related to gender, ..."

Tom,

Oh good point. I like that. So:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments, for example ones related to
gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size,
race or personal attacks.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

We value the opinions of members who have contributed most more than we value the opinions of others.

A CoC is not the place to say some animals are more equal than others. A core commiter calling someone the n- or b- words is just as bad as me, a non commiter (if not worse!)

While we do consider people's feelings, we weigh that against the effort of changing long understood terminology and the psychological trauma

such changes would cause for the large majority of people who are not as sensitive to the usage.

What psychological trauma? From changing terms? Are you crazy? (See for that you'd like to the CoC to tell me why that wasn't an appropriate way to express my disbelief that someone would equate a change of term to psychological trauma.

Also, "because it's been that way always" and "it would be a minor inconvience to a lot of people" are rarely good reasons to dismiss a valid objection to a term.

Also, it all sounds too fluffy.

Also, why did you have a quote at the top? Were you responding to something?

Jim

On January 11, 2016 5:56:08 PM EST, Regina Obe <lr@pcorp.us> wrote:

2. The CoC is not about being offended. The act of being offended is

purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is more
interested in being a victim than moving forward.

Here is my latest version. Let me know if I should throw in a github
repo so it's easier to read or if you have other plans for a Coc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like the open source technical community as a whole, our community is
made up of a mixture of professionals and volunteers with vast
differences of opinions and
styles of communication. Our community is made up of people from many
cultures and walks of life who have come together
with the common goals of making a great piece of software and helping
others use this software.

We value contributions from everybody. By contributions we mean code,
documentation, project outreach in form of setting up conferences or
working groups,
package maintenance, answering and asking questions in our forums which
further our mission, and providing bug reports.

If you have contributed to our project, then we consider you a member
of our extended family and value your opinions and concerns very
highly.

We value the opinions of members who have contributed most more than we
value the opinions of others.
This is because major contributors have already proved their desire to
further our mission, and for newcomers,
their intention has not yet been established.

We want everyone entering our community willing to help out to feel
welcomed.

To maintain and encourage a welcoming environment we ask all people
interacting with our community to follow these guidelines when in our
public spaces. By public spaces we mean mailing lists, IRC channels,
Code repositories, and reporting bug reports

GUIDELINES

1) When in discussions keep focused on the topic being discussed.
2) Say helpful things, and if you feel you have nothing to say that
furthers the discussion, say nothing.

By helpful we mean for example:
If someone asks a question, even if it's one that you think has an
obvious answer, either provide an example or a link to the section of
the manual that covers it.

If you feel a person does not provide enough information for someone to
help, point them to this link:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Guide_to_reporting_problems

3) Do not switch the topic to yourself unless the topic happens to be
about you.
For example if someone is asking a question about replication, and the
words master and slave come up in discussion,
do not talk about the great master/slave sex you had last night.

4) Do not ask questions that are unrelated to the mission of our
project.

USE OF TRIGGER TERMS

We have long standing terms like Master/Slave that may trigger some
past trauma for some people.
While we do consider people's feelings, we weigh that against the
effort of changing long understood terminology and the psychological
trauma
such changes would cause for the large majority of people who are not
as sensitive to the usage.
As such we entertain change requests for naming of new features more
than we do of renaming old features.

HANDLING ISSUES

We understand that through no fault of anybody, a person may make a
comment they consider harmless that others find very offensive or makes
another feel small. As project maintainers
we will monitor these and gently call people out on them even if they
are a member of our maintainer group.

By gentle call out, we mean something like "I think what X was trying
to say was that you need to do this" or point them to this document and
specific bullet point we feel they violated.

We expect of everyone in our spaces to try their best to do the same in
a kind and gentle manner. If you feel it's just a minor offense and the
person didn't mean harm by it,
simply ignore it unless the pattern of talk continues.

If anyone is being purposely antagonistic please notify the project
maintainer group at ... with the specific occurrence and evidence that
made you feel this way.
We will judge if your complaints are valid and if we deem they are
valid we will talk with the person to affect a change in their behavior
or kick them out if we determine behavior change is not possible.

We do not tolerate those we feel are trying to derail our project by
injecting
discussions that have little to do with the mission of our project.
If you have contributed nothing to our project and you make demands for
change, we will try to tell you that kindly
and request you to change or leave.

We promise as project maintainers to apply the same standards on
ourselves as we apply to others.

Thanks,
Regina

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Why must it be free of personal comments?

"Tom, I like the way you handed this issue. Good work!" Is a personal comment.

Why do we need lists? What specifically is wrong with "that focuses on the tech and not the person" version?

Jim

On January 11, 2016 6:04:03 PM EST, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

On 01/11/2016 02:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:

How about we meet in the middle:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual
orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or
personal attacks.

That's not really meeting in the middle: it still specifies exactly
one set of disapproved topics. Might be OK if it read like
"... personal comments, for example ones related to gender, ..."

Tom,

Oh good point. I like that. So:

A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments, for example ones related to
gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size,

race or personal attacks.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

""" A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free of non-technical or personal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race. """

I really think you should leave out the whole " gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size or race."

I can think of several things not accounted for there that I consider personal and a big turn-off.

As I said my biggest issue is when people are not helpful and make snide remarks about my choice of operating system, what mail client I use, or what editor I use to edit my code with, and what is my preferred programming language. That is not covered.

So the point is not being helpful should be avoided. If you are helpful it's really hard to be making fun of people's gender, sexual orientation, disability , physical appearance, body size or race or any other special classifications someone identifies themselves with.

I think people understand the concept of helpful.

Thanks,
Regina

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

tl;dr;

* Modified #2 to be less harsh.
* Modified #3 with TGL and James comments
* Did not remove examples as I believe they are vital to the success

I saw Regina's post, I believe it is good for context but I also believe
that something concise and to the point is the better path.

PostgreSQL Global Development Group (PGDG) Code of Conduct (CoC):

1. The CoC is to provide community guidelines for creating and enforcing
a safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person
who is willing to contribute in a safe, respectful, productive and
collaborative way.

2. The CoC is not about being offended. As with any diverse community,
anyone can get offended at anything.

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free
of non-technical or personal comments, for example ones related to
gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size,
race or personal attacks.

4. Any sustained disruption of the collaborative space (mailing lists,
IRC etc..) or other PostgreSQL events shall be construed as a violation
of the CoC and appropriate action will be taken by the CoC committee.

5. The CoC is only about interaction with the PostgreSQL community. Your
private and public lives outside of the PostgreSQL community are your own.

6. The CoC is not about Social Justice.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

We value the opinions of members who have contributed most more than we value the opinions of others.

A CoC is not the place to say some animals are more equal than others. A core commiter calling someone the n- or b- words is just as bad as me, a non commiter (if not worse!)

Yes it is. If a stranger comes and wants something changed, and Tom Lane says no. You should go with Tom Lane. Period.

Now the whole n-or-b thing gets into obvious not helpful dialogue which is not helpful. I'm sure anyone would agree that if Tom called me a nigger, it's not helpful to our communication, and you should therefore tell him to shut-up regardless who he is.

So the point is, some things ARE about fluffy opinions and when such disputes arise and there is a tie, the people who have contributed to a project more should win.

So that means if you like Josh's Coc as much as my Coc and you can't decide you should go with his.

While we do consider people's feelings, we weigh that against the effort of changing long understood terminology and the psychological trauma

such changes would cause for the large majority of people who are not as sensitive to the usage.

What psychological trauma? From changing terms? Are you crazy? (See for that you'd like to the CoC to tell me why that wasn't an appropriate way to express my disbelief that someone would equate a change of term to psychological trauma.

Think about if all your life when you've been talking about replication you've been using master/slave, and someone says from now on, It's leader/follower.

So now in every conference you go to you need to catch yourself when you are saying Master/Slave – oops I meant to say Leader / Follower.

To me that's psychological trauma. It's the same psychological trauma I had to face being born a left-handed and being forced to write with my right-hand.

Also, "because it's been that way always" and "it would be a minor inconvience to a lot of people" are rarely good reasons to dismiss a valid objection to a term.

I left the door open for that intentionally – we are more okay with changing new undecided terms than old terms. I should add cost in there.

Also, why did you have a quote at the top? Were you responding to something?

Mistake.

Thanks,

Regina

Jim

On January 11, 2016 5:56:08 PM EST, Regina Obe <lr@pcorp.us <mailto:lr@pcorp.us> > wrote:

2. The CoC is not about being offended. The act of being offended is purely a recipient response and usually the offended individual is more interested in being a victim than moving forward.

Here is my latest version. Let me know if I should throw in a github repo so it's easier to read or if you have other plans for a Coc.

_____

Like the open source technical community as a whole, our community is made up of a mixture of professionals and volunteers with vast differences of opinions and
styles of communication. Our community is made up of people from many cultures and walks of life who have come together
with the common goals of making a great piece of software and helping others use this software.

We value contributions from everybody. By contributions we mean
code, documentation, project outreach in form of setting up conferences or working groups,
package maintenance, answering and asking questions in our forums which further our mission, and providing bug reports.

If you have contributed to our project, then we consider you a member
of our extended family and value your opinions and concerns very highly.

We value the opinions of members who have contributed most more than we value the opinions of others.
This is because major contributors have already proved their desire to further our mission, and for newcomers,
their intention has not yet been established.

We want everyone entering our community willing to help out to feel welcomed.

To maintain and encourage a welcoming environment we ask all people interacting with our community to follow these guidelines when in our
public spaces. By public spaces we mean mailing lists, IRC channels, Code repositories, and
reporting bug reports

GUIDELINES

1) When in discussions keep focused on the topic being discussed.
2) Say helpful things, and if you feel you have nothing to say that furthers the discussion, say nothing.

By helpful we mean for example:
If someone asks a question, even if it's one that you think has an obvious answer, either provide an example or a link to the section of the manual that covers it.

If you feel a person does not provide enough information for someone to help, point them to this link: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Guide_to_reporting_problems

3) Do not switch the topic to yourself unless the topic happens to be about you.
For example if someone is asking a question about replication, and the words master and slave come up in discussion,
do not talk about the great master/slave sex you had last night.

4) Do
not ask questions that are unrelated to the mission of our project.

USE OF TRIGGER TERMS

We have long standing terms like Master/Slave that may trigger some past trauma for some people.
While we do consider people's feelings, we weigh that against the effort of changing long understood terminology and the psychological trauma
such changes would cause for the large majority of people who are not as sensitive to the usage.
As such we entertain change requests for naming of new features more than we do of renaming old features.

HANDLING ISSUES

We understand that through no fault of anybody, a person may make a comment they consider harmless that others find very offensive or makes another feel small. As project maintainers
we will monitor these and gently call people out on them even if they are a member of our maintainer group.

By gentle call out, we mean something like "I think what X was trying to say was
that you need to do this" or point them to this document and specific bullet point we feel they violated.

We expect of everyone in our spaces to try their best to do the same in a kind and gentle manner. If you feel it's just a minor offense and the person didn't mean harm by it,
simply ignore it unless the pattern of talk continues.

If anyone is being purposely antagonistic please notify the project maintainer group at ... with the specific occurrence and evidence that made you feel this way.
We will judge if your complaints are valid and if we deem they are valid we will talk with the person to affect a change in their behavior or kick them out if we determine behavior change is not possible.

We do not tolerate those we feel are trying to derail our project by injecting
discussions that have little to do with the mission of our project.
If you have contributed nothing to our project and you make demands for change, we will
try to tell you that kindly
and request you to change or leave.

We promise as project maintainers to apply the same standards on ourselves as we apply to others.

Thanks,
Regina

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 12 Jan 2016, at 0:16, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free of non-technical or personal comments, for example ones related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or personal attacks.

I'm not debating whether there should be examples or not, they are usually useful, but perhaps examples belong in a separate section and not in the core CoC?

Frankly though, this thread looks like a testament of why Postgres doesn't really need a CoC. You people are all being so polite about it that it's almost offensive!

Alban Hertroys
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
cut the trees and you'll find there is no forest.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On 1/11/2016 6:41 PM, Alban Hertroys wrote:

On 12 Jan 2016, at 0:16, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

3. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free of non-technical or personal comments, for example ones related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or personal attacks.

I'm not debating whether there should be examples or not, they are usually useful, but perhaps examples belong in a separate section and not in the core CoC?

Maybe one of those sentences like "... free of personal attacks,
including but not limited to...", followed by a link to a page that
randomly generates a list of a dozen or so "protected classes". If your
particular deviance isn't in the list you can refresh and hope for the
best. And the "not limited to" part would allow us to castigate someone
who is just really good at being a bully through the loopholes.

And before someone says I'm the worst person ever for using the word
"deviance", I meant like statistically (nobody ever complains about
being in the majority).

-- Stephen

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general