Adding Code of Conduct #9394

egircys · 2018-03-05T18:03:14Z

lsmith77 · 2018-03-05T20:56:26Z

javiereguiluz · 2018-03-06T16:16:07Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+* Public or private harassment
+* Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or electronic
+  address, without explicit permission
+* Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a


I'm still 👎 about this phrase:

Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting.

The reason, as explained multiple times in the other pull request, is that this clause is a backdoor to potential power abuse by the enforcement team.

The other items of the list are perfectly reasonable and perfectly defined: sexualized language, trolling, harassment, doxxing, etc. But the last phrase is a "catch-all" clause that says: we'll ban anything that we consider inappropriate.

Noted .. just for the record my previously stated response to this objection:
we cannot realistically list every objectionable behavior. this is not a legal document as we lack the infrastructure to handle rules at this level of detail. I understand the concern for a "power grab", but since the enforcement team is appointed by the core-team, there is still a way to stop the enforcement team if they ever do get out of hand.

I have thought about this some more and consulted an expert in code of conduct enforcement. My conclusion is that opening up the records to the entire core team is too much in conflict with insuring privacy. As such I would say its sufficient that if the core team suspects that there is overreach happening, that they simply use the power to change the members in the enforcement team. Of course members of the core team can then also become members of the enforcement team as part of this process. But the goal is to better protect privacy by:

limiting access to the records to as few people as possible

limiting access to people that have invested time into educating themselves on the topic (and ideally received some formal training).

I would say its sufficient that if the core team suspects that there is overreach happening, that they simply use the power to change the members in the enforcement team

And how can we know or suspect that if we don't have access to any information? If the entire Core Team is too much, then please give access to a small representation of the Core Team (three people for example).

If people from the core team are interested in the topic enough, then why don't they just become part of the enforcement team?

It's not about being part of the ET (Enforcement Team) ... we need an outside control of ET to ensure that they don't exceed their competences, that they don't act arbitrarily, etc. It'd be nice if someone (or a small group of people) from the CT (Core Team) watches the ET.

I propose myself as a candidate for that role: overseeing the ET. My proposed workflow would be that the designated person would have full access to all reports and all decisions from the ET. That person won't attend meetings of ET, won't make any decision, won't revoke any decision and won't change anything. If that person thinks that the ET is acting wrongly in some case, he/she will report it to the CT so the entire core team members can make a decision about that.

imho this creates more problems than it potentially solves .. not even the ET will have automatic access to all reports since depending on the people involved people will recuse themselves or reports may wish to not include specific people due to certain experiences.

now we would have to also keep some people in the loop that are not even part of the process.

Power Abuse is also a point we can add to the code of conduct.

javiereguiluz · 2018-03-06T16:18:14Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+
+Enforcement team members who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good
+faith may face temporary or permanent repercussions as determined by other
+members of the project's leadership.


This is too vague: as determined by other members of the project's leadership. Who exactly is going to watch the enforcement team actions and which will be their tools to do that?

We should update this section to be "core team" I would propose.

OK. Don't forget to please detail how the Core Team will oversee the Enforcement Team (I guess we'll need full private access to all decisions and reports to deem if there's been an inappropriate conduct by some Enforcement member). Thanks!

that is a good point .. how much transparency on the records is needed for oversight.
the enforcement team is likely going to receive formal training. furthermore incidents records may not even be shared with the entire enforcement team, depending on if they recuse themselves or people involved specifically wish they don't get involved.

as such its a bit tricky to give blanket full access to the records to the core team. but I very much acknowledge that in case over reach is suspected, access the the records may be critical to make a final judgement by the core team.

so this seems like an important topic to also cover within the process.

/cc @Nyholm @michaelcullum @egircys

dunglas · 2018-03-06T23:32:27Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and
+our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body
+size, disability, ethnicity, gender identity and expression, level of experience,
+education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race,


It's maybe a cultural difference, but are we sure we want to use the "race" word?

Quoting Wikipedia:

Since the second half of the 20th century, the association of race with the ideologies and theories of scientific racism has led to the use of the word race itself becoming problematic. Although still used in general contexts, race has often been replaced by less ambiguous and loaded terms: populations, people(s), ethnic groups, or communities, depending on context.
...
European Union

According to European Council:

The European Union rejects theories which attempt to determine the existence of separate human races.

— Directive 2000/43/EC[144]

The European Union uses the terms racial origin and ethnic origin synonymously in its documents and according to it "the use of the term 'racial origin' in this directive does not imply an acceptance of such [racial] theories".[144][145][full citation needed] Haney López warns that using "race" as a category within the law tends to legitimize its existence in the popular imagination. In the diverse geographic context of Europe, ethnicity and ethnic origin are arguably more resonant and are less encumbered by the ideological baggage associated with "race". In European context, historical resonance of "race" underscores its problematic nature. In some states, it is strongly associated with laws promulgated by the Nazi and Fascist governments in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s. Indeed, in 1996, the European Parliament adopted a resolution stating that "the term should therefore be avoided in all official texts".

The concept of racial origin relies on the notion that human beings can be separated into biologically distinct "races", an idea generally rejected by the scientific community. Since all human beings belong to the same species, the ECRI (European Commission against Racism and Intolerance) rejects theories based on the existence of different "races". However, in its Recommendation ECRI uses this term in order to ensure that those persons who are generally and erroneously perceived as belonging to "another race" are not excluded from the protection provided for by the legislation. The law claims to reject the existence of "race", yet penalize situations where someone is treated less favourably on this ground.

See also: EthicalSource/contributor_covenant#512 / EthicalSource/contributor_covenant#476

We could follow the same practices of European bureaucrats and replace ethnicity and race by just ethnic origin. It conveys the same meaning but it's less controversial for some people.

javiereguiluz · 2018-03-07T09:47:34Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+In the interest of fostering an open and welcoming environment, we as
+contributors and maintainers pledge to making participation in our project and
+our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body
+size, disability, ethnicity, gender identity and expression, level of experience,


After the last change, ethnicity and ethnic origin are used in the same paragraph. We should remove ethnicity and keep just ethnic origin.

javiereguiluz · 2018-04-19T12:59:48Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+behavior and are expected to take appropriate and fair corrective action in
+response to any instances of unacceptable behavior.
+
+Enforcement team members have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or


I'd like a reword of this:

Enforcement team members have the right [...] to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.

The phrase reads: "if enforcement members don't consider something appropriate, you will be banned". But it should read, "if enforcement members find something inappropriate according to the CoC, you will be banned".

The enforcement members don't have unlimited power. Punishments must be based on the CoC, not on this team people's opinions.

I guess you commented on the wrong line number? 😃

javiereguiluz · 2018-04-19T13:00:44Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+:doc:`may be reported </contributing/code_of_conduct/reporting_guidelines>`
+by contacting the :doc:`enforcement team members </contributing/code_of_conduct/enforcement_team>`.
+All complaints will be reviewed and investigated and will result in a response that
+is deemed necessary and appropriate to the circumstances. The project team is


The project team -> The enforcement team

Actually, I'd argue that the entire project team is "obligated to maintain confidentiality".

OK ... but we need to define somewhere what "project team" means. E.g. "project team = core team + enforcement team"

I think it's meant that the enforcement team would keep the reporter confidential. The project team does not really need to know by whom was it reported.

javiereguiluz · 2018-04-19T13:01:53Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+Further details of specific enforcement policies may be posted separately.
+
+Enforcement team members who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good
+faith may face temporary or permanent repercussions as determined by the core team.


the core team could be a link to /current/contributing/code/core_team

sroze · 2018-04-19T13:13:42Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+response to any instances of unacceptable behavior.
+
+Enforcement team members have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
+reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions


Shouldn't it be wiki pages instead of wiki edits ?

I believe wiki edits has the adding of new wiki pages and the editing of existing ones covered

sroze · 2018-04-19T13:15:24Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+:doc:`may be reported </contributing/code_of_conduct/reporting_guidelines>`
+by contacting the :doc:`enforcement team members </contributing/code_of_conduct/enforcement_team>`.
+All complaints will be reviewed and investigated and will result in a response that
+is deemed necessary and appropriate to the circumstances. The project team is


Actually, I'd argue that the entire project team is "obligated to maintain confidentiality".

sroze · 2018-04-19T13:17:38Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+Enforcement team members have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
+reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions
+that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or
+permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate,


Might already have been answered (and sorry if it's the case) but what does that mean to "ban a contributor"? Can't we also "ban" non-contributors? Also, it might be worth clarifying what a "contributor" is because I suspect here we also refer to people who write comments only while somewhere else on the website, "contributors" or just the people who have commits within the codebase.

I can't remember it was asked, at least not directly. As I understand it's possible to ban a contributor only on the managed platforms, i.e. github (https://help.github.com/articles/blocking-a-user-from-your-organization/), slack and so on. A contribution is mentioned above as comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions. While the other contributions is open for interpretation (e.g. a slack conversation).

I would see slack included here .. I am hestitant to explicitly mention all our “official” platforms of communication, since it means we need to update this frequently. but if it helps clarity maybe we should?

so what are the official places?

github

symfony.com

slack

symfony events

That being said, I am also hoping that some projects within our eco-system start adopting our CoC and enforcement process. So in that respect explicit listing might not be ideal. I was hoping for us to implement GDPR which would have entailed actually asking people to consent to the CoC on all our platforms, which in turn would mean that if anyone also adopts our CoC, they would then ask for consent on those additional platforms.

javiereguiluz · 2018-04-19T13:18:50Z

michellesanver · 2018-04-20T08:28:38Z

xabbuh · 2018-04-20T13:35:35Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+-----------
+
+This Code of Conduct is adapted from the `Contributor Covenant`_, version 1.4,
+available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html


Is that link required here since "Contributor Covenant" is already linked?

Good catch! The Contributor Covenant should actually link to https://www.contributor-covenant.org

xabbuh · 2018-04-20T13:35:41Z

contributing/code_of_conduct/index.rst

+This Code of Conduct is adapted from the `Contributor Covenant`_, version 1.4,
+available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct.html
+
+Related documents


fabpot · 2018-04-30T17:10:13Z

lsmith77 · 2018-04-30T20:30:59Z

carsonbot added the Status: Needs Review label Mar 5, 2018

egircys mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2018

Add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md symfony/symfony#24896

Merged

javiereguiluz reviewed Mar 6, 2018

View reviewed changes

dunglas reviewed Mar 6, 2018

View reviewed changes

egircys mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2018

Human Race(s?) EthicalSource/contributor_covenant#476

Open

javiereguiluz added the diversity & inclusion Related to Symfony Diversity Initiative https://github.com/symfony/diversity label Mar 7, 2018

javiereguiluz reviewed Mar 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

lsmith77 approved these changes Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

javiereguiluz reviewed Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

sroze reviewed Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

xabbuh reviewed Apr 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

egircys and others added 8 commits April 30, 2018 19:09

Adding Code of Conduct

eba3ecf

add link to examples document

464ea45

Change "project's leadership" to "core team"

1b0e633

Change "race" to "ethnic origin"

2f8aa5d

Replace ethnicity with ethnic origin

e61a403

add link to core team

0e7b539

change project team to enforcement team

2de768f

update contributor covenant link & documents fix

02e4860

fabpot changed the base branch from master to 2.7 April 30, 2018 17:09

fabpot force-pushed the code_of_conduct branch from cca944e to 02e4860 Compare April 30, 2018 17:09

fabpot merged commit 02e4860 into symfony:2.7 Apr 30, 2018

egircys deleted the code_of_conduct branch April 30, 2018 19:03

dunglas mentioned this pull request May 29, 2018

Add COC file, remove some files from generated archives api-platform/api-platform#703

Merged

Uh oh!

Adding Code of Conduct #9394

Adding Code of Conduct #9394

Uh oh!

Conversation

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!