[llvm-dev] RFC: Second draft of an LLVM Community Code of Conduct

[Sean Silva via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:23 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Pasi Parviainen via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14.10.2015 23:36, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote:
>>>
>>>> * **Be welcoming.** We strive to be a community that welcomes and
>>>> supports
>>>>    people of all backgrounds and identities. This includes, but is not
>>>> limited
>>>>    to members of any race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, colour,
>>>>    immigration status, social and economic class, educational level,
>>>> sex,
>>>> sexual
>>>>    orientation, gender identity and expression, age, size, family
>>>> status,
>>>>    political belief, religion or lack thereof, and mental and physical
>>>> ability.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> * **Be careful in the words that you choose.** We are a community of
>>>>    professionals, and we conduct ourselves professionally. Be kind to
>>>> others. Do
>>>>
>>>
>>> What kind of professionals? Professional boxers perhaps? Who do have a
>>> habit to get under the skin of the opponent with a insults before the match.
>>>
>>> Rarely people in their teens, or early twenties would be considered as
>>> professional on any area of expertise. So by claiming that community
>>> consist of professionals, aren't you already discriminating against
>>> individuals who do not have any professional (what ever it may be) interest
>>> on the project?
>>
>>
>> I agree the particular phrasing here (at least to me) reads as
>> disparaging to people who are not employed to work on LLVM.
>>
>
> This phrasing is clearly too confusing to too many readers at this point.
> Its value was marginal anyways, and so I've just removed it.
>
>
>>
>> As a side note: this whole bullet point is sort of weird. It is titled "Be
>> careful in the words that you choose." which makes it sound like it is
>> about incidental oversights, but everything after the second sentence seems
>> pretty unrelated. E.g. one of the examples is "Posting (or threatening
>> to post) other people's personally identifying information ("doxing")."
>> - how does that fall under anything involving "be careful"? Similarly for "Unwelcome
>> sexual attention." in what way does that involve "the words that you
>> choose"; is there a choice of words that makes "Unwelcome sexual
>> attention." any more or less acceptable?
>>
>
> It's not about it being more or less acceptable, it is that these
> consequences might not be intended. The most common cases here are around
> "Discriminatory jokes and language." but several of the other categories
> could be unintended as well.
>
> These can usually be solved easily with a quick note to someone saying
> "Hey, you may not have intended that joke to be interpreted as ____, but it
> is, so you should probably not make it here." No big deal. If the person
> doesn't feel comfortable doing that, they can ask the advisory committee to
> do it for them *and that will be the extent of what happens*. A quick note
> to the person that "Hey, you may not have realized it, but ...".
>
> It is (IMO) still important for it to be here, because once this is
> explained, *repeating* it gets worse and worse. And there are cases which
> are unambiguous and clearly unacceptable even once -- physical threats for
> example.
>

> We could separate the two cases, but it isn't clear that this is a useful
> distinction. I think the primary problem is something you point out below...
>

I think we're in agreement here. In the "this whole bullet point is sort of
weird" paragraph I wasn't suggesting changing the content, just
reorganizing/rewording to make it a bit more coherent (which is what you
did, thanks!).

-- Sean Silva


>
> Was there a typo and "Be kind to others" should start a new top-level
>> bullet point? `* **Be kind to others.** ...`
>>
>
> The original wording definitely has it structured as I did in my document.
> But I really like this suggestion. There are really two things here: be
> careful about the words you choose (because they may have unintended
> consequences otherwise) *and* to be kind to others.
>
> So in addition to deleting the sentences that referenced "professionals",
> I have merged the two halves into a single highlighted header. I hope that
> helps, but please let me know.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151020/68a502be/attachment.html>