[SwellJoe]

I think the value of a CoC is merely to signal to people who have experienced abuse or disrespect in communities before (which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time) that the community is on their side when sexists or racists show up. That has some value. It doesn't really matter to the majority, and it doesn't actually alter how people behave (generally), nor does it really alter a project leaders ability to excise a toxic person. But, it does say, "We will excise toxic people. We will try to make you feel welcome here, even if you have been made to feel unwelcome elsewhere."

Even if that's all it does (which I think it probably is), it is enough to make it worth doing in most cases. (Which reminds me that I don't have a code of conduct on any of the open source projects or communities I work on, but I'll make it a project for the first quarter of this year.)

[DannyBee]

"I think the value of a CoC is merely to signal to people who have experienced abuse or disrespect in communities before (which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time) that the community is on their side when sexists or racists show up. "

If a COC becomes a baseline requirement for people to run projects and attract contributors, ISTM the people who don't care will just add COC's, and never enforce them.

You say "But, it does say, "We will excise toxic people. We will try to make you feel welcome here, even if you have been made to feel unwelcome elsewhere.""

It does not actually do that. It's one level removed from that. It's "we say we will excise toxic people.". It in fact, may be the case that you go to ask them to enforce it, and they say "sorry, don't care", even with a COC.

Then you are back to square 1. You essentially are trying to use the COC as a proxy for "communities that will care enough to put a stop to things" and i'm pretty much 100% it will not achieve this goal.

[SwellJoe]

Of course a CoC can't make a community actually do anything. These are Open Source communities we're talking about here, and nobody can make anyone do anything at all.

You're alleging that a CoC is meaningless, but why implement a CoC, as a community, if you don't actually want more women and people of color becoming involved in your projects? The CoC is the signal saying, "We, as a community, want you to feel welcome here."

That's all I'm saying it does, and all I'm suggesting it can do, and I say that's sufficient cause to implement a CoC, if you want more women and people of color in your community.

So, to repeat, a CoC is a signal of desire to be inclusive. It is not a law, it is not a guarantee, it won't make assholes stop being assholes. It is a sign on the door saying, "We're gonna try to be welcoming. Come on in."

[DannyBee]

"You're alleging that a CoC is meaningless, but why implement a CoC, as a community, if you don't actually want more women and people of color becoming involved in your projects? The CoC is the signal saying, "We, as a community, want you to feel welcome here.""

See the part where i directly answer this: "If a COC becomes a baseline requirement for people to run projects and attract contributors,"

IE if people stop going to projects without COC's, people will add COC's.

I'm not sure why you think anything else will happen.

"So, to repeat, a CoC is a signal of desire to be inclusive."

It is this second. As I said, if it becomes a thing people look for, it will no longer be that, because everyone will just add them and ignore them. It will no longer be a signal for what you are looking for. It will achieve precisely nothing.

Again, I'm honestly befuddled why you think anything else would happen

Do you really think normal people trying to start projects are going to say "well, i really want to attract contributors of all kinds, and it seems i have to have a COC, that i don't care about, to do that, but i guess it would just be wrong to have a COC if i don't care?"

Or do you think they are just going to say "well, i really want to attract contributors of all kinds, i better add a COC that i don't really care about".

I mean, this is already happening. How many projects are like our OP, and basically go and say "well, i should probably add a COC, but i don't really care".

You need look no further than things like yellow/pink ribbons/flag pins senators wear/etc to see what will happen. These things were once signals of people who cared. Now they are just social norms.

[WizzleKake]

which would describe, I think, most women and people of color who have participated in technical communities for more than a short time

This is an odd assumption to make.

[SwellJoe]

Is it?

It may seem that way to a white dude (I'm a white dude, and I suffered from the delusion that tech communities were inclusive for decades), surrounded by white dudes. You're not alone...lots of people think tech is inclusive. I always assumed that our communities were more welcoming than usual, despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in tech.

But, I've been told it is true from enough women and people of color that I believe it to be true. It's been discussed at great lengths by women and people of color on blogs, on mailing lists, on twitter, etc. I'm not sure what it would take to convince you, but I probably don't have the words to do it, so I'm not gonna try.

For people who acknowledge that our communities do not have a history of being inclusive, it is probably useful to post a CoC in order to signal that we are aware of that history of sexism and racism and acknowledge our willingness to take responsibility for it when it happens in communities we manage, if even in a small way.

[moonchrome]

>despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in tech.

Are asians suddenly white and only black people are people of color ? I see asians significantly represented in the tech community (especially India with English history and emigration to west). And they are at all levels of tech from CEO to us regular code monkeys.

[SwellJoe]

Do you believe that because Asian folks have reasonable (maybe even over-) representation in tech, that tech is an inclusive environment for all people of color, as well as women?

Edit: And, another thing!...I believe I've personally seen more anti-Asian racism in tech than most other kinds of racism (though the extreme level of sexism in tech far surpasses any racism I've seen). Fake Indian accents and jokes about English skills abound among nerd circles, for example. It may merely be because I know more Asian tech workers than folks from other races and have worked in environments with a reasonably large Asian population. It is possible to ignore racism or sexism and power through and keep doing your job, but it doesn't mean the environment is welcoming or inclusive.

[moonchrome]

>Do you believe that because Asian folks have reasonable (maybe even over-) representation in tech, that tech is an inclusive environment for all people of color, as well as women?

IMO tech industry is the most meritocratic sector I've seen, even more the little I've seen from academia. Note - it's far from being some ideal meritocracy, there's plenty of PHB, politics and plain old corporate bullshit, but low barriers to entry, highly competitive environment, high impact work with low iteration time and the scaling model of software really helps steer incentives towards actually hiring the best person for the job.

I believe the reason these other groups are not represented in tech is mostly because of factors outside of tech industry (social) and tech industry shouldn't be reaching backwards to support underrepresented groups simply because they are underrepresented. If the society sees a problem with this imbalance then they are free to fix the issue at the source instead of trying to fix a thing that works relatively well.

[SwellJoe]

I don't want to keep harping on the "as a white dude" theme, here, but that's what I keep hearing. As white dudes we don't see race or gender, because we aren't made to see it in our daily lives.

Tech is a meritocracy for white dudes. For everyone else, it is a little bit meritocracy, and a little bit toxic environment where they are made to feel their minority status on a regular basis. I'm not saying this because I want white dudes to feel guilty, or I don't want white dudes to continue to feel welcome in tech communities (again, I'm a white dude). But, until we acknowledge that women at tech conferences are simply not treated the same as white dudes; black folks are not treated the same as white applicants when applying for jobs; trans folks are gendered incorrectly casually or jokingly (I've seen it happen here at HN numerous times); we're contributing to the problem.

"tech industry shouldn't be reaching backwards to support underrepresented groups simply because they are underrepresented"

So, I'm confident you aren't intending to be racist or sexist...but, do you realize what you're suggesting here? That welcoming women and people of color into our communities is to "reach backwards"? Are you genuinely suggesting there are no women or people of color that are capable of contributing to projects you work on? That their contribution would be detrimental to a project?

They are underrepresented in many communities because they have been pushed out, repeatedly. Certainly, there are systemic problems, as well. And until we have large numbers of female hackers and black and brown hackers in the world at large, we won't see significant numbers of them in our communities. But, we've been told by women who are hackers that they've been made to feel unwelcome, unsafe, harassed. We've been told by black and brown folks who are hackers (sometimes impressively so) that they've experienced racism. And, that those situations have led to them leaving or never joining in the first place. Why do so many white dudes want to insist those stories are lies?

"If the society sees a problem with this imbalance then they are free to fix the issue at the source instead of trying to fix a thing that works relatively well."

So, it is society's responsibility to make the open source projects we work on more inclusive? I don't follow. I think we should start with what we have the most direct control over. I have commit bits on a handful of large open source projects. I can make something happen there. I don't have "commit bits" on the education system, the police, the federal or local government, television or movies, or much of anything else.

In short, you say we're trying to fix something that isn't broken...but, I believe women and people of color when they tell me that it is broken for them. I don't see it; it's never been broken for me. But, I'm white and male in America. The system (whatever "system" we're talking about) is pretty much always functional for me.

[mpweiher]

> despite the evidence to the contrary in the form of such low historic participation by women and people of color in tech

Low participation is evidence of exactly one thing: low participation. It says nothing about the causes and is not evidence of non-inclusiveness.

[SwellJoe]

OK.

[mst]

The public discussion about this stuff doesn't necessarily justify 'most' but it absolutely demonstrates 'many'. And 'many' seems to me to be quite sufficient to justify CoC adoption as being positive overall.

[mc808]

This isn't exactly scientific, but just go over to YouTube and read the comments whenever a woman gives a technical talk. Now imagine a role reversal where, whenever a straight male gives a talk, you can count on it receiving numerous comments from gay men saying they love a guy with brains, or how badly they want to fuck the guy (or that he isn't attractive enough for that), or that he should go back to the garage and fix me a motorcycle. Maybe it's only a small minority of comments, but it doesn't take much to make the whole environment feel hostile.

[nijiko]

As much as it is fun to utilize arbitrary examples, a CoC wouldn't solve Youtube comment issues. See what I mean?

[mc808]

I just pulled up a video that I remember having particularly bad comments, and the comments were gone. I guess that channel does have a code of conduct, even if it's not formalized. I don't know that publishing a CoC document "solves" anything, but at the very least it acknowledges that the sort of conduct I was illustrating does exist and should be discouraged.

Perhaps it's along the same lines as the "don't piss in my pool" sign. Some visitors may see it as a sign that you care about water quality and will feel safer jumping in. Others might wonder if it indicates that a lot of people do piss in your pool.

[nijiko]

Arbitrary notions of safety and conduct. People know how they should conduct themselves, and those who will do something wrong don't care.

Arbitrary notions of power. Does enacting this over the members of this community improve anything? No. There are no issues within it to begin with. Nobody is rampantly "pissing in the pool" on a daily basis, hell even monthly basis at that.

Arbitrary notions of acknowledgment. Do you read through every ToS you've agreed to? No.

[alextgordon]

And furthermore, the comments can be turned off.

[dmgbrn]

This, absolutely.

Communities can be healthy without a CoC, or unhealthy with one. But having a CoC sends a big, clear message to women and other groups frequently marginalized in the tech scene that your project is healthy and welcoming.

Here's why that's a big deal: joining an open source project is an investment. If you are a woman, or black, or trans, or god forbid, some combination thereof in tech, you really don't want to become invested in a community that will at some point treat you like shit. And let's be real guys, many, many communities do treat women and minorities like shit.

A CoC, and just as importantly, the discussion surrounding one, is a simple sign that a community is a place where you can be a woman or a minority and contribute to open source without fear of harassment, abuse, marginalization, and other dangers faced by non-white-dudes in tech.