[xenadu02]

Are you serious or arguing insincerely? I can't tell.

Codes of conduct are a direct response to ongoing harassment and stalking against various contributors of various open-source projects, followed by inaction on the part of the project maintainers or the excuse of "that just can't handle criticism".

What is so offensive about saying "make it about the code, not about the person" and "don't stalk, dox, or harass people"?

A code of conduct is a signal that juvenile behavior won't be tolerated and that if your code reviewer starts sending you dick pics they'll get banned from the project. It doesn't do anything by itself - if the project maintainers don't follow through it is worthless but like security lights and door locks the signaling value has an effect on people's behavior.

And for the record it protects while males too.

[mikekchar]

I'm not the parent poster, but will post anyway. I really don't want to get into this discussion, which is kind of ironic because the reason I don't want to get into the discussion is the very reason codes of conduct are purported to exist. It is very easy to become targeted and vilified if you happen to have a different point of view on the subject.

A very common clause in codes of conduct is that people who are identified with a project must uphold the code of contact when they are communicating, even when they do so outside the context of the project. Usually "identified with a project" is defined loosely enough that it can be used fairly indiscriminately. It has happened that people who voiced objectionable ideas outside the context of a project have been forcibly removed from those projects.

For some, this is a triumph of justice. For others (and I include myself in this camp) it is further fostering an "us" vs "them" viewpoint, vilifying those whose ideas differ. Interpersonal conflict is difficult and requires considerable skill to moderate. A code of conduct, while it can simply be a communication of the ideals that the project strives towards, can be used as a scaffolding to attack those who we disagree with and wish to punish.

[cariaso]

He's quite sincere, and there are others of us who agree. Codes of conduct are a flavor of the month, and they don't achieve anything. I don't need to pre-announce that I will not accept patches from murderers or pedophiles, I can simply do it. The same is true for the types of offenses typical of a code of conduct.

Perhaps it is generational, and the new guard will eventually win this battle one funeral at a time. But as a politically liberal curmudgeon, 'codes of conduct' feel like the beta release of 'safe spaces'.

please go back to Pokemon Go-ing on my lawn... quietly. Daddy has to focus on writing code.

[sanswork]

>Codes of conduct are a flavor of the month, and they don't achieve anything

In other words you've never felt harassed. That's a good thing but it doesn't mean your situation is all encompassing.

>The same is true for the types of offenses typical of a code of conduct.

Also a good thing. How many times have you rejected a patch because someone was harassing another member of your community?

[dredmorbius]

I support codes of conduct, for multiple reasons stated and not in this thread.

I do not support putting words into someone else's mouth, particularly on socially explosive (hence the discussion in the first place) or ideologically driven issues.

Asking if someone's ever been harassed is one thing. Stating point blank that they haven't, crosses a line. Your interlocutor knows their personal history. You don't. Don't presume. It's a cheap shot, often derailing.

[sanswork]

You're right.

[mixedCase]

He says "Codes of conduct" don't work and your response is this?:

>In other words you've never felt harassed.

Do you fail to see the problem here?

>Also a good thing. How many times have you rejected a patch because someone was harassing another member of your community?

Does one need a written down, politically charged, potentially divisive document in legalese to say "I don't want to share my toys with the class bully"?

[sanswork]

He said codes of conduct don't achieve anything. The only way to believe that is to have never felt harassed. So no I don't see the problem.

>Does one need a written down, politically charged, potentially divisive document in legalese to say "I don't want to share my toys with the class bully"?

Apparently yes given the number of abusive people that have been active members of a lot of communities which now have codes of conduct.

[cariaso]

> The only way to believe that is to have never felt harassed.

Try believing that I could have been harassed, but feel that a code of conduct would not have prevented nor resolved the problem.

[sanswork]

I've tried and I can't. Could you please share what happened to help me understand?

[RaleyField]

People police themselves better if they know what is expected behavior and there aren't any gray areas.

Otherwise you have owner arguing with contributor drama trying to explain implied etiquette. Of course unless the transgression was severe the owner is forced to be lenient for fear of appearing overly authoritarian (which would drive away some contributors), but they can't be entirely forgiving because the transgression might drive away some other (or same) people. CoC removes this bargaining.

[flukus]

>I don't need to pre-announce that I will not accept patches from murderers or pedophiles, I can simply do it.

The question is, why would you care? What the person does in their personal life is outside the scope of the project.

[marssaxman]

I am completely serious and meant exactly what I said. I did not say that it was offensive; I said that I don't understand where the practice came from. I have never been part of an open source community where "stalking, doxing, or harassing" was a problem - or at least not a problem anyone talked about. It sounds very strange, and it's hard to imagine how people that immature could be capable of doing good engineering work, but if that's the problem then I understand why people are trying to solve it.

[vertex-four]

A whole bunch of projects suffer from the issue - even (especially) ones as large as FreeBSD[0]. The issue usually winds up being that some minor contributor - or even just someone who hangs around in the dev channels - harasses some specific woman/trans person/other minority member, and the project has no official framework in which to approach this issue. Often in the project leaders' eyes, the project leader's job is all about code, not community management, leading to a call of "sort it out yourselves" when it's brought up to them - which is essentially a signal that the project will allow its contributors to harass each other without repercussion.

Basically - the sorts of people who women have to get conference organisers to have a quiet word with and/or ban don't stop being assholes on the Internet. If anything, they become worse, and it's easier to hide that behaviour when it winds up being in large part through private messages and communication systems other than the project's official ones.

(If you were associated with a volunteer group irl, and you started harassing your co-volunteers through Facebook and email and text messages, you'd hopefully be kicked out. Various CoC debates show that many people think that if the volunteer group is online, such behaviour should be excused.)

A Code of Conduct isn't magic, but it does provide social proof that the project leaders at least thought of the issues that can affect their contributors, and can provide a yardstick to judge whether a project is likely to at least listen about issues affecting contributors who are members of minorities.

[0] https://blog.randi.io/2015/12/31/the-developer-formerly-know...

[marssaxman]

Thank you for explaining and providing a really shocking example. This helps me understand.

[sanswork]

> or at least not a problem anyone talked about

Is a big part of the problem. A lot participants don't want to be seen to be rocking the boat so they let stuff slide that they really shouldn't in the effort to not be "that person".

A formal code of conduct gives people the support up front to come forward with complaints about other members.

[wtbob]

> A code of conduct is a signal that juvenile behavior won't be tolerated

Hardly: a code of conduct is juvenile behaviour. It's like when I was a little kid and drafted a huge constitution for my amazing awesome cool club — that was just me.

Adults don't need to write down a code of conduct, because they adhere to an unwritten code of conduct. Children whinge, 'you shouldn't do that, because this says not to!'; adults don't do that, because they know that they oughtn't — and they refrain from associating with others who do. Children want their clique to gang up on the people they don't like; adults simply walk away from those people.

Childhood is all about, 'you can't'; adulthood is all about 'I won't.'

[mwfunk]

I agree that that's how it ought to be; I strongly disagree that that's how it is. Plenty of people are physically adults; a subset of those people are mentally adults. This is even worse in the world of tech forums and open source projects than it is in the world at large.

FWIW, I have yet to see a code of conduct that really says anything beyond "don't be a jerk, and act like a grownup". It might be silly if it also told me how to dress on Tuesdays and who to vote for, but in reality they rarely or never say anything beyond "don't be a jerk, and act like a grownup." I also have no problem with someone else reminding me of that, because I have to remind myself of that all the time. I don't know why anyone would be offended by such a thing.

[marssaxman]

I suppose that's part of the reason I've had trouble understanding this phenomenon: the couple of "code of conduct" documents I've read have seemed so inoffensively obvious that it is hard to understand why such a document would be necessary, much less why it would be controversial. It alarms me that people care so much about them that merely expressing confusion about the purpose or utility of such a document acts as an invitation for criticism, and it reinforces my perception that these are not my people, arguing about something that doesn't concern me, and I don't want to get involved. I suspect that this is not what the people promoting codes of conduct are actually trying to do. I'm mentioning it in hopes that becoming aware that the harsh moralistic approach is alienating people who might otherwise support their project will help them do a better job, because it sounds like the overall effort is worthwhile.

[mwfunk]

I guess I don't interpret the presence of a code of conduct as an alienating, harsh, moralistic approach to anything. It's about as alienating/harsh/moralistic as a kitten, if the kitten was easily ignored and made of ASCII.

[marssaxman]

It's not the code of conduct document itself which seems harsh and moralistic, but the us-versus-them, tribal-feeling advocacy which accompanies it. The two code-of-conduct documents I have read were so inoffensive I couldn't tell what the point of instituting them was; but right here in this discussion there's a fairly hostile attitude toward people who are not on board with the idea, as though one must either embrace this novel code-of-conduct practice or be labelled a troglodyte. The more I have read today about the purpose of these codes of conduct, the more I like what the people promoting them are trying to do; but I'm still stuck with this feeling that they aren't my people, and don't consider me to be their people, and it's pretty much "do what we say or we think you're an asshole." Which... does not strike me as the most effective way of achieving change. Wouldn't it be more useful to bring people on board by engaging with us and explaining what's going on?

[colemickens]

omg but your oppressive code of conduct may prevent me from harassing or berating someone down the line, so I better act like they stifle speech even though I can't find a single example of them doing so!!111 /s

It really is magical to see these people that think that everyone are supposedly always courteous to each other throw such a shit fit over codifying that into an official policy.

[ofbriggs]

> Adults don't need to write down a code of conduct, because they adhere to an unwritten code of conduct. Children whinge, 'you shouldn't do that, because this says not to!'; adults don't do that, because they know that they oughtn't — and they refrain from associating with others who do. Children want their clique to gang up on the people they don't like; adults simply walk away from those people.

Because no adult has ever harassed another in a programming community? I would love it if everyone behaved politely and courteously, however this is not currently what is happening in some projects. Having a CoC is merely a preventative measure to curb bad behavior for those who can't self-police.

[colemickens]

In this thread are men literally defending sending unsolicited dick pics to unwilling participants.

Feel free to waste your breath trying to convince me that CoCs aren't needed.

[nitwit005]

I can't help but notice that no matter how often this comes up, no one ever points to an incident of a code of conduct fixing something.

I do see a lot of complaints about heated arguments about having a code of conduct, and plenty of evidence of those arguments existing.

[sanswork]

There is one from the Rust team below.

[nitwit005]

As far as I can tell, they are simply claiming it's a project with a code of conduct that seems welcoming. There appear to be projects that don't have a code of conduct that could be described the same way, so it's not useful as evidence of an effect.

My university participated in a study that found their anti-alcohol posters appeared to increase student drinking. Admittedly, with not as large a data set as desired, so it's also possible they simply did nothing. You find this with a huge array of both government and non-profit efforts. Most of the time, the things we try to improve society simply don't work, or not to the degree desired.

[sanswork]

They said their discussions have been more productive since the change.

[prodigal_erik]

Out of all codes of conduct, how many will allow the next Linus or Theo de Raadt to emerge? It seems to me that most are driven by the same animus against crimethink that brought us donglegate.

[ciupicri]

What's so bad about a code reviewer which starts sending you dick pics compared to a code reviewer which starts sending you cat pics? They're both a waste of time.

[moosingin3space]

Dick pics fall into the category of "unwanted sexual advances", which is a form of harassment.

[ciupicri]

I guess some people could see it that way given the donglegate scandal, but it can't be harassment if it's not repeated. And if something is to be repeated, then lots of things can be used besides dick pics.

[moosingin3space]

> it can't be harassment if it's not repeated

Pretty sure there are a LOT of women who would strongly disagree.

[ciupicri]

No, it's just annoying or a simple threat if it's one time only. From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass (emphasis mine):

> Simple Definition of harass: to annoy or bother (someone) in a constant or repeated way; to make repeated attacks against (an enemy).

[dragonwriter]

"sexual harassment" is a term with its own specific definition, which is not precisely a naïve combination of the simplest common definitions of "sexual" and "harassment".

[cjk101010]

Not only women... I totally feel harassed when someone sends me a dick pick

[dragonwriter]

> but it can't be harassment if it's not repeated.

Incorrect. Sexual harassment doesn't require repeated conduct, though repeated conduct is more likely to be harassment (both because it is more likely to create a hostile environment simply because of the pervasiveness, and because it is more likely that the actor will be in a position where they should reasonably have known that it was unwelcome.)

[to3m]

The thing that's so bad about dick pics is people don't like them. And what better reason for something being bad could there be?

[ciupicri]

Not people, just some people. Also there are people who don't like cats.

[to3m]

Would you believe I've just spent 25 minutes trying to figure out how to respond to this, and I still don't know.

I suppose that means you win.

[drivingmenuts]

While one might be an annoying waste of your time, the other is not only annoying, but quite possibly illegal as well.

I leave it to you to figure out which is which.

[ciupicri]

What's so illegal in some dick pics?

[drivingmenuts]

Send one to a person under the age of 18 and I'm sure the prosecution, the judge and possibly your eventual roommate might be willing to explain it in ways that make you regret ever asking that question.