Talk:Code of Conduct

From coreboot
Revision as of 23:31, 7 February 2015 by Hailfinger (talk | contribs) (Include a TOC)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Our Code of Conduct is a pretty new work, and might benefit from some refinement in a couple of places. Let's discuss things here, so we can adopt sensible changes.

Proposed rules for changes (that are open for discussion as well): Changes will be accepted when the "pros" seriously outweigh the "cons" (ideally there are none of the latter) and when the arbitration team agrees (since they will bear the load).

Singling out "Harassment"

Carl-Daniel is unhappy with the list after "Harassment includes:", because it (as Patrick understands it) singles out that behavior, minimizing the others (that are just as horrible).

Proposal: Remove the paragraph "Harassment includes:" completely.

Pros: Less emphasis on "harassment", hopefully making it (more) clear that all of the unacceptable behaviors are horrible.

Cons: ???

I (Carl-Daniel) think that Stefan's version of Patrick's proposal to instead label that list "Examples of behaviors we do not accept in our community" is a good idea and will not pursue the removal further.

Rephrase the 'check your motives' part

Proposal: Rephrase "Check your motives: Using this code of conduct aggressively against other people in the community might also be harassment. Behave." to be friendlier

Pros: The proposed version is a real improvement.

Cons: ???


Some words about assessing code quality

Proposal: Add to the list in the chat etiquette something like: 'Code that you are changing wasn't perfect (or you wouldn't change it). However, try to avoid assuming that it was written by monkeys, or that it must have always been broken. It's likely that it used to work and it's likely that your new work is necessary and important because circumstances changed where the code didn't.'

Pros: Remind people that there's a coder behind the code. Assuming bad intent or stupidity (and doing so publicly) is as much a statement about the code as about the coder.

Cons: Is that micromanaging things?