Comments on A Code of Conduct, dare I say it
Parent
A Code of Conduct, dare I say it
TL;DR: I've just created a Code of Conduct, and I'd like your feedback on it.
Let's see if we can make a better go of this than Stack Exchange, hey?
It's mostly based on the Community Covenant CoC, with some adaptations to make it make more sense as applied here.
Have a read through, and leave any feedback you have in an answer here. I'll make the document mod-editable, so it's not just me who can make changes to it. While the current state of the document is the sort of thing I'd recommend using, it's up to you exactly how you want it to read - the only strong recommendation I'd make is that some form of CoC is almost always necessary.
I was hoping that our code of conduct could be something closer to the "be nice" model, something like this: - Be res …
5y ago
It's too long, and it's filled with squishy prescriptions. Yes, we won't tolerate harassment. But I think it is a mista …
5y ago
Perhaps my favorite CoC would be the one currently used by the Ruby language quoted here: > This document provides co …
5y ago
I've reviewed the updated CoC, and overall it looks pretty good. I like the basic and short approach, and I like it bein …
5y ago
I love it in its current form. Short. Simple. And primarily, it deals with being nice on an individual level, n …
5y ago
> Keep it "safe-for-work" (SFW). It's fine to discuss controversial topics, but discuss them in an adult manner without …
5y ago
I just heard about this place (thanks icanfathom). Willing to give it a try. Of course, the first thing I checked on was …
5y ago
Post
It's too long, and it's filled with squishy prescriptions. Yes, we won't tolerate harassment. But I think it is a mistake to try and define every possible form of harassment.
Make it a law of intent, not of specifics. (It's a real thing, laws of intent, and the "intent" of a perpetrator is determined by judges or juries. Intent is the difference between murder and manslaughter.)
Set a policy of escalating punishment, if it is clearly (in your role as a human being) somebody's INTENT to harass, insult, frighten, discourage or otherwise hurt feelings or denigrate someone, they will be warned, suspended, banned, in some escalating fashion, based on the severity of the transgression.
Same thing for "Be Nice." We are humans reading, we can pretty much tell when somebody is being insulting, or snarky, or dismissive, or using dominating language to assert authority they don't have. None of that is nice.
Perhaps those need to evolve to include specific clarifying examples if there is actually a misunderstanding of something, but obviously a CoC is allowed to evolve, you can add those examples when true clarification is needed, which is rarely.
I would like to see some Bill of Rights. Is profanity automatically prohibited? My writing contains profanity, because in my experience, about 99% of adults use it times. But even "damn" offends some people, am I not allowed to use "damn" in a question or answer (presuming my intent was not to insult anyone)?
Can we talk about religion (or lack thereof)? Can we talk about politics? Can we talk about sexual acts? Can we talk about racism, or abortion rights? All of those are fair game in novels, in newspapers, in movies. All those things will offend some people.
Does "being nice" mean this site is suitable for kindergärtners, or is it actually for adults writing to capture something about real life?
EDIT as response to modified CoC:
That's better. I would take minor issue with the following, the prescription to "take it in good spirits". :
Be open to constructive feedback. If others offer feedback on your content or your communication, take it in good spirits. Conversely, if someone tells you they don't want feedback, don't force it on them.
I would suggest: Be open to constructive feedback. Insulting feedback should be flagged. If it isn't insulting, presume it is intended to help. If someone rejects your feedback for any reason, logical or not, stop pushing it.
0 comment threads