Adoption of a Code of Conduct

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
66 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Stefan van der Walt
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!
Stéfan
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

ralfgommers


On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

+1

Maybe a bit of context: the SciPy code of conduct had quite a lot of discussion, and importantly in the end everyone involved in the discussion was happy with (or at least not displeased by) the final document. Hence I see it as a good document to adopt also by other projects.

And here's what I wrote as the intro for that CoC discussion:
As you probably know, Code of Conduct (CoC) documents are becoming more common every year for open source projects, and there are a number of good reasons to adopt a CoC:
1. It gives us the opportunity to explicitly express the values and behaviors we'd like to see in our community.
2. It is designed to make everyone feel welcome (and while I think we're a welcoming community anyway, not having a CoC may look explicitly unwelcoming to some potential contributors nowadays).
3. It gives us a tool to address a set of problems if and when they occur, as well as a way for anyone to report issues or behavior that is unacceptable to them (much better than having those people potentially leave the community).
4. SciPy is not yet a fiscally sponsored project of NumFOCUS, however I think we'd like to be in the near future.  NumFOCUS has started to require having a CoC as a prerequisite for new projects joining it.  The PSF has the same requirement for any sponsorship for events/projects that it gives.

Note on (4): NumPy is a sponsored project of NumFOCUS, and I've been asked several times how it can be that NumPy is sponsored but does not have a CoC.

Cheers,
Ralf


If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!
Stéfan
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Marten van Kerkwijk
My ideal version would be substantially shorter, maybe just quote the golden rule, but I am happy with the suggestion to just adapt this text. I particularly appreciate the lack of absolutism in the text, and the acknowledgement that it is possible to have a bad day even while not distracting from the overall message.
-- Marten

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

+1

Maybe a bit of context: the SciPy code of conduct had quite a lot of discussion, and importantly in the end everyone involved in the discussion was happy with (or at least not displeased by) the final document. Hence I see it as a good document to adopt also by other projects.

And here's what I wrote as the intro for that CoC discussion:
As you probably know, Code of Conduct (CoC) documents are becoming more common every year for open source projects, and there are a number of good reasons to adopt a CoC:
1. It gives us the opportunity to explicitly express the values and behaviors we'd like to see in our community.
2. It is designed to make everyone feel welcome (and while I think we're a welcoming community anyway, not having a CoC may look explicitly unwelcoming to some potential contributors nowadays).
3. It gives us a tool to address a set of problems if and when they occur, as well as a way for anyone to report issues or behavior that is unacceptable to them (much better than having those people potentially leave the community).
4. SciPy is not yet a fiscally sponsored project of NumFOCUS, however I think we'd like to be in the near future.  NumFOCUS has started to require having a CoC as a prerequisite for new projects joining it.  The PSF has the same requirement for any sponsorship for events/projects that it gives.

Note on (4): NumPy is a sponsored project of NumFOCUS, and I've been asked several times how it can be that NumPy is sponsored but does not have a CoC.

Cheers,
Ralf


If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!
Stéfan
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Charles R Harris


On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
My ideal version would be substantially shorter, maybe just quote the golden rule, but I am happy with the suggestion to just adapt this text. I particularly appreciate the lack of absolutism in the text, and the acknowledgement that it is possible to have a bad day even while not distracting from the overall message.

I tend to the shorter is better side as well, but need to reread what SciPy ended up with.

<snip>

Chuck 


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Stephan Hoyer-2
In reply to this post by Marten van Kerkwijk
I would be happy to adopt the SciPy code of conduct and code of conduct committee both.

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:04 PM Marten van Kerkwijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
My ideal version would be substantially shorter, maybe just quote the golden rule, but I am happy with the suggestion to just adapt this text. I particularly appreciate the lack of absolutism in the text, and the acknowledgement that it is possible to have a bad day even while not distracting from the overall message.
-- Marten

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

+1

Maybe a bit of context: the SciPy code of conduct had quite a lot of discussion, and importantly in the end everyone involved in the discussion was happy with (or at least not displeased by) the final document. Hence I see it as a good document to adopt also by other projects.

And here's what I wrote as the intro for that CoC discussion:
As you probably know, Code of Conduct (CoC) documents are becoming more common every year for open source projects, and there are a number of good reasons to adopt a CoC:
1. It gives us the opportunity to explicitly express the values and behaviors we'd like to see in our community.
2. It is designed to make everyone feel welcome (and while I think we're a welcoming community anyway, not having a CoC may look explicitly unwelcoming to some potential contributors nowadays).
3. It gives us a tool to address a set of problems if and when they occur, as well as a way for anyone to report issues or behavior that is unacceptable to them (much better than having those people potentially leave the community).
4. SciPy is not yet a fiscally sponsored project of NumFOCUS, however I think we'd like to be in the near future.  NumFOCUS has started to require having a CoC as a prerequisite for new projects joining it.  The PSF has the same requirement for any sponsorship for events/projects that it gives.

Note on (4): NumPy is a sponsored project of NumFOCUS, and I've been asked several times how it can be that NumPy is sponsored but does not have a CoC.

Cheers,
Ralf


If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!
Stéfan
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Stefan van der Walt
In reply to this post by Marten van Kerkwijk
On July 27, 2018 17:04:23 Marten van Kerkwijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

My ideal version would be substantially shorter, maybe just quote the golden rule, but I am happy with the suggestion to just adapt this text.

Agreed! There's some basic ground that needs to be covered, though, and the result of exploring that fully is, practically, what you see here.

I'm not opposed to modifying the document in principle, although I reckon it would be somewhat easier, from both a maintenance and adoption perspective, to use the same.

Best regards, 
Stéfan 

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Charles R Harris
In reply to this post by Stefan van der Walt


On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Nathan Goldbaum
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

See e.g. 

As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a real concern that should be considered.

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:25 PM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

ralfgommers


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?


As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a real concern that should be considered.

There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those beliefs in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying that we welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if someone starts expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not deserving human rights) on any of our communication forums or in an in-person meeting, that would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be dealt with via the reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.

I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing the "political beliefs" phrase.

Cheers,
Ralf

 

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:25 PM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Nathan Goldbaum


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?

Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:

 


As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a real concern that should be considered.

There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those beliefs in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying that we welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if someone starts expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not deserving human rights) on any of our communication forums or in an in-person meeting, that would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be dealt with via the reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.

I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing the "political beliefs" phrase.

For another perspective on this issue see https://where.coraline.codes/blog/oscon/, where Coraline Ada describes her reasons for not speaking at OSCON this year due to a similar clause in the code of conduct.


Cheers,
Ralf

 

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:25 PM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Matthew Brett
Hi,

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 4:12 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy
>>> code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the
>>> inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.
>>
>>
>> It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember.
>>
>>>
>>> See e.g.
>>> https://github.com/jupyter/governance/pull/5
>>
>>
>> That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political
>> beliefs?
>
>
> Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:
>
> https://github.com/jupyter/governance/pull/56
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that
>>> other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas
>>> like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a
>>> real concern that should be considered.
>>
>>
>> There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those beliefs
>> in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying that we
>> welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if someone starts
>> expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not deserving human
>> rights) on any of our communication forums or in an in-person meeting, that
>> would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be dealt with via the
>> reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.
>>
>> I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing
>> the "political beliefs" phrase.
>
>
> For another perspective on this issue see
> https://where.coraline.codes/blog/oscon/, where Coraline Ada describes her
> reasons for not speaking at OSCON this year due to a similar clause in the
> code of conduct.

I agree with Ralf.  From your link:

"""
But the inclusion of this language, making political affiliation a
protected class, leads me to believe that alt-right technologists
would be as welcome at the conference as I would be. Including
alt-right technologists who display on their clothing, for example,
neo-Nazi insignia. Or t-shirts printed with anti-trans or anti-Black
slogans. These could easily be interpreted as protected political
speech.
"""

That's the point.  If you wear a t-shirt with anti-trans or anti-Black
slogans to a Scipy event covered by the code of conduct, that would
qualify as 'expressing things that are intolerant', as Ralf put it.

Cheers,

Matthew
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

ralfgommers
In reply to this post by Nathan Goldbaum


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?

Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:


Thanks, that's useful context for your question.

I'm personally not too attached to "political belief", but I think the discussion in that PR and in the OSCON context is very US-centric and reflective of the polarized atmosphere there.

If everyone is fine with removing political beliefs then I'm fine with that, but I don't think that the argument itself (from a non-US perspective) has much merit.


 


As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a real concern that should be considered.

There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those beliefs in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying that we welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if someone starts expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not deserving human rights) on any of our communication forums or in an in-person meeting, that would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be dealt with via the reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.

I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing the "political beliefs" phrase.

For another perspective on this issue see https://where.coraline.codes/blog/oscon/, where Coraline Ada describes her reasons for not speaking at OSCON this year due to a similar clause in the code of conduct.

There's a lot of very unrealistic examples in that post. Plus retracting a week in advance of a conference is, to put it mildly, questionable. So not sure what to think of the rest of that post. There may be good points in there, but they're obscured by the obvious flaws in thinking and choice of examples.

Cheers,
Ralf
 


Cheers,
Ralf

 

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:25 PM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Ilhan Polat
I agree with Ralf. That thread is more towards a US based separation. Actually we briefly touched upon these on the SciPy side but indeed there was no real discussion.

Political beliefs (especially communism in US for a practical example) can offend some people and that's OK because being offended by itself doesn't have a merit. There will always be someone getting offended by anything. But racism, sexism etc. are not "political" stances and deserve to be united against regardless whether someone is offended or not.

Actually calling these discriminating doctrines as "political beliefs" is making me quite nervous instead.







On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?

Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:


Thanks, that's useful context for your question.

I'm personally not too attached to "political belief", but I think the discussion in that PR and in the OSCON context is very US-centric and reflective of the polarized atmosphere there.

If everyone is fine with removing political beliefs then I'm fine with that, but I don't think that the argument itself (from a non-US perspective) has much merit.


 


As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a real concern that should be considered.

There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those beliefs in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying that we welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if someone starts expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not deserving human rights) on any of our communication forums or in an in-person meeting, that would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be dealt with via the reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.

I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing the "political beliefs" phrase.

For another perspective on this issue see https://where.coraline.codes/blog/oscon/, where Coraline Ada describes her reasons for not speaking at OSCON this year due to a similar clause in the code of conduct.

There's a lot of very unrealistic examples in that post. Plus retracting a week in advance of a conference is, to put it mildly, questionable. So not sure what to think of the rest of that post. There may be good points in there, but they're obscured by the obvious flaws in thinking and choice of examples.

Cheers,
Ralf
 


Cheers,
Ralf

 

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:25 PM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html

We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time
stating clearly the kinds of behavior that would and would not be
tolerated.

I propose that we adopt the SciPy code of conduct for NumPy as well.  It
is a good way to signal to newcomers that this is a community that cares
about how people are treated.  And I think we should do anything in our
power to make NumPy as attractive as possible!

If we adopt this document as policy, we will need to select a Code of
Conduct committee, to whom potential transgressions can be reported.
The individuals doing this for SciPy may very well be happy to do the
same for NumPy, but the community should decide whom will best serve
those roles.

Let me know your thoughts.

+1 from me.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Charles R Harris
In reply to this post by ralfgommers


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?

Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:


Thanks, that's useful context for your question.

I'm personally not too attached to "political belief", but I think the discussion in that PR and in the OSCON context is very US-centric and reflective of the polarized atmosphere there.

If everyone is fine with removing political beliefs then I'm fine with that, but I don't think that the argument itself (from a non-US perspective) has much merit.

I'm strongly opposed to removing it. The last thing I want is to have politics brought into NumPy development, which is where this discussion is already headed. It could get ugly fast.

Chuck


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Ian Henriksen
This. Even from a US perspective, we really need to not let political division into even more apparently non-political things. As far as I can tell, the current language seems to be there to specifically avoid that. It isn't there to allow discrimination if someone tries to claim they're making a political statement.

Best,

Ian

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 10:58 AM Charles R Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.

It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember. 


See e.g. 

That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political beliefs?

Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:


Thanks, that's useful context for your question.

I'm personally not too attached to "political belief", but I think the discussion in that PR and in the OSCON context is very US-centric and reflective of the polarized atmosphere there.

If everyone is fine with removing political beliefs then I'm fine with that, but I don't think that the argument itself (from a non-US perspective) has much merit.

I'm strongly opposed to removing it. The last thing I want is to have politics brought into NumPy development, which is where this discussion is already headed. It could get ugly fast.

Chuck

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Nathaniel Smith
In reply to this post by ralfgommers
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I realize this was probably brought up in the discussions about the
>>>> scipy code of conduct which I have not looked at, but I’m troubled by the
>>>> inclusion of “political beliefs” in the document.
>>>
>>>
>>> It was not brought up explicitly as far as I remember.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> See e.g.
>>>> https://github.com/jupyter/governance/pull/5
>>>
>>>
>>> That's about moving names around. I don't see any mention of political
>>> beliefs?
>>
>>
>> Sorry about that, I elided the 6. This is the correct link:
>>
>> https://github.com/jupyter/governance/pull/56
>
>
> Thanks, that's useful context for your question.
>
> I'm personally not too attached to "political belief", but I think the
> discussion in that PR and in the OSCON context is very US-centric and
> reflective of the polarized atmosphere there.
>
> If everyone is fine with removing political beliefs then I'm fine with that,
> but I don't think that the argument itself (from a non-US perspective) has
> much merit.

Probably a plurality of contributors are from the US though, so we
can't exactly hand-wave away how it reads in the US...

>>>> As a thought experiment, what if someone’s political beliefs imply that
>>>> other contributors are not deserving of human rights? Increasingly ideas
>>>> like this are coming into the mainstream worldwide and I think this is a
>>>> real concern that should be considered.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is a difference between having beliefs, and expressing those
>>> beliefs in ways that offends others. I don't see any problem with saying
>>> that we welcome anyone, irrespective of political belief. However, if
>>> someone starts expressing things that are intolerant (like someone else not
>>> deserving human rights) on any of our communication forums or in an
>>> in-person meeting, that would be a clear violation of the CoC. Which can be
>>> dealt with via the reporting and enforcement mechanism in the CoC.
>>>
>>> I don't see a problem here, but I would see a real problem with removing
>>> the "political beliefs" phrase.

I think there's two separate issues here: (a) whether things people
express outside our forums should be considered relevant within our
forums, (b) what we're communicating by calling out "political belief"
as a thing that we won't exclude people over.

This isn't happening in a vacuum either... if you search for
"lambdaconf" you can see a ton of discussion about a programming
conference that decided to invite a guy who's a high-profile leader in
the pro-feudalism / pro-white-supremacism community (I can't believe
I'm typing that), and then conference justified it by saying things
like "we're supporting diversity of beliefs" and "this talk is purely
about his technical work, let's keep politics out of it". As it turns
out, the technical work in question is actually super tied to his
political activism -- like in the original version of the system, his
crypto key was the "king" that gave him ultimate authority, which he
could delegate to "dukes", etc. (IIRC -- I'm not looking up the
details, but it was something about that blatant.) Also all kinds of
cult-y stuff about how contributors were special chosen ones, them
against the world -- it was super creepy. But then he got VC funding,
because of course he did, and went through and renamed things as a
figleaf, so they could claim it was "purely technical".

FWIW, my personal opinion is that I'm categorically uninterested in
working with anyone like that. I don't care if they only say the
ghastly things in non-numpy channels or claim that it's "merely a
political disagreement", I'm still not interested.

>> For another perspective on this issue see
>> https://where.coraline.codes/blog/oscon/, where Coraline Ada describes her
>> reasons for not speaking at OSCON this year due to a similar clause in the
>> code of conduct.
>
> There's a lot of very unrealistic examples in that post. Plus retracting a
> week in advance of a conference is, to put it mildly, questionable. So not
> sure what to think of the rest of that post. There may be good points in
> there, but they're obscured by the obvious flaws in thinking and choice of
> examples.

Ralf, I love you, but this paragraph sounds like a parody from "How to
suppress women's writing" or something.

Coraline Ada is a prominent expert on code-of-conduct issues, and also
a trans woman, so she gets death threats and other harassment
constantly and "will the conference organizers protect me if someone
comes after me?" is a real question she has to ask. She wrote a blog
post about how O'Reilly's handling of this (not just the language, but
the totality of circumstances -- the way it was added, the response to
her queries, etc.) made her feel that attending would be unsafe for
her, so she didn't attend. (And about how distressed she was to
realize this just a week before the conference.)

It seems like you're taking her post as some logical argument about
CoCs in the abstract, with the withdrawal as some kind of
brinksmanship, and judging it by those standards?

FWIW, the Sage Sharp who's quoted at the beginning of Ada's post and
initially raised the issue, is also well-known expert on CoC issues,
e.g. PyCon hired them to help revamp their policies and respond to
incidents this year [1].

When experts say that something is a bad idea, and when the people who
a CoC is supposed to protect says it makes them feel unsafe, I feel
like we should listen to that.

I also thought that the points made in the Jupyter discussion thread
made a lot of sense: of course it's possible for people to start
harassing each other over any excuse, and a CoC can, should, and does
make clear that that's not OK. But if you specifically *call out*
political affiliation as a protected class, at a time when lots of the
people who the CoC is trying to protect are facing governmental
harassment justified as "mere political disagreement", then it really
sends the wrong message.

Besides, uh... isn't the whole definition of politics that it's topics
where there is active debate? Not really sure why it's even in that
list to start with.

-n

[1] https://pycon.blogspot.com/2018/04/code-of-conduct-updates-for-pycon-2018.html

--
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Ryan May-3
When experts say that something is a bad idea, and when the people who
a CoC is supposed to protect says it makes them feel unsafe, I feel
like we should listen to that.

I also thought that the points made in the Jupyter discussion thread
made a lot of sense: of course it's possible for people to start
harassing each other over any excuse, and a CoC can, should, and does
make clear that that's not OK. But if you specifically *call out*
political affiliation as a protected class, at a time when lots of the
people who the CoC is trying to protect are facing governmental
harassment justified as "mere political disagreement", then it really
sends the wrong message.

Besides, uh... isn't the whole definition of politics that it's topics
where there is active debate? Not really sure why it's even in that
list to start with.

So I hear all the arguments about people feeling unsafe due to some truly despicable, discriminatory behavior, and I want absolutely no parts of protecting that. However, I also recognize that we in the U.S. are in a particularly divisive atmosphere, and people of varied political persuasions want absolutely nothing to do with those who share differing views. So, as a concrete example, if someone were to show up at a NumPy developer summit with a MAGA ("Make America Great Again") hat, or talks about their support for the president in non-numpy channels, WITHOUT expressing anything discriminatory or support for such views, if "political beliefs" is not in the CoC, is this person welcome? I'm not worried about my own views, but I have friends of widely varying views, and I truly wonder if they would be welcome. With differing "political beliefs" listed as something welcomed, I feel ok for them; if this language is removed, I'm much less certain.

IMO, "political beliefs" encompasses so much more things than a handful of very specific, hateful views. People can disagree about a wide array of "political beliefs" and it is important that we as a community welcome a wide array of such views. If the CoC needs to protect against the wide array of discriminatory views and behavior that make up U.S. politics right now, how about specifically calling those behaviors out as not-welcome, rather than completely ignoring the fact that 99% of "political beliefs" are perfectly welcome within the community?

The CoC is about spelling out the community norms--how about just spelling out that we welcome everyone, but, in the words of Will Wheaton, "Don't be a dick"?

Ryan
 
--
Ryan May


_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Nathaniel Smith
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Ryan May <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So I hear all the arguments about people feeling unsafe due to some truly
> despicable, discriminatory behavior, and I want absolutely no parts of
> protecting that. However, I also recognize that we in the U.S. are in a
> particularly divisive atmosphere, and people of varied political persuasions
> want absolutely nothing to do with those who share differing views. So, as a
> concrete example, if someone were to show up at a NumPy developer summit
> with a MAGA ("Make America Great Again") hat, or talks about their support
> for the president in non-numpy channels, WITHOUT expressing anything
> discriminatory or support for such views, if "political beliefs" is not in
> the CoC, is this person welcome? I'm not worried about my own views, but I
> have friends of widely varying views, and I truly wonder if they would be
> welcome. With differing "political beliefs" listed as something welcomed, I
> feel ok for them; if this language is removed, I'm much less certain.

This is a difficult scenario. I do know lots of people who are
uncomfortable with MAGA hats, and it's not because of they disagree
about the details of some farm bill or whatever, it's because it's
increasingly impossible to use that slogan without also expressing
support for racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. -- i.e., all the other
things that the CoC lists as unacceptable.

So I feel like... to the extent that some political position *isn't*
tied up with those things, I can't see why people would have a problem
with it, or why the CoC would need to bother mentioning it. (There are
all kinds of things we don't mention – "we welcome people with odd
*and* even telephone numbers!") And to the extent that some political
position *is* tied up with those things... it would be pretty
contradictory to list it as a protected class alongside race, sex,
etc.

I'm not going to go track people down on facebook and try to guess how
they voted or something, but if someone wore a MAGA hat to a numpy
sprint then I'd be totally fine with asking them to take it off in
consideration of the other participants.

-n

--
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Robert Kern-2
In reply to this post by Ryan May-3
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:35 PM Ryan May <[hidden email]> wrote:
When experts say that something is a bad idea, and when the people who
a CoC is supposed to protect says it makes them feel unsafe, I feel
like we should listen to that.

I also thought that the points made in the Jupyter discussion thread
made a lot of sense: of course it's possible for people to start
harassing each other over any excuse, and a CoC can, should, and does
make clear that that's not OK. But if you specifically *call out*
political affiliation as a protected class, at a time when lots of the
people who the CoC is trying to protect are facing governmental
harassment justified as "mere political disagreement", then it really
sends the wrong message.

Besides, uh... isn't the whole definition of politics that it's topics
where there is active debate? Not really sure why it's even in that
list to start with.

So I hear all the arguments about people feeling unsafe due to some truly despicable, discriminatory behavior, and I want absolutely no parts of protecting that. However, I also recognize that we in the U.S. are in a particularly divisive atmosphere, and people of varied political persuasions want absolutely nothing to do with those who share differing views. So, as a concrete example, if someone were to show up at a NumPy developer summit with a MAGA ("Make America Great Again") hat, or talks about their support for the president in non-numpy channels, WITHOUT expressing anything discriminatory or support for such views, if "political beliefs" is not in the CoC, is this person welcome? I'm not worried about my own views, but I have friends of widely varying views, and I truly wonder if they would be welcome. With differing "political beliefs" listed as something welcomed, I feel ok for them; if this language is removed, I'm much less certain.

IMO, "political beliefs" encompasses so much more things than a handful of very specific, hateful views. People can disagree about a wide array of "political beliefs" and it is important that we as a community welcome a wide array of such views. If the CoC needs to protect against the wide array of discriminatory views and behavior that make up U.S. politics right now, how about specifically calling those behaviors out as not-welcome, rather than completely ignoring the fact that 99% of "political beliefs" are perfectly welcome within the community?

The CoC is about spelling out the community norms--how about just spelling out that we welcome everyone, but, in the words of Will Wheaton, "Don't be a dick"?

I agree that it's worth clarifying in the text what this clause is intended to do. I think it has been misinterpreted as defining a legalistic set of protected classes along the lines of anti-discrimination laws and can be interpreted by itself outside of the context of the CoC as a whole. But it's not that. It's an aspirational statement, and a high one, at that, if we interpret it at its broadest. We will fail to meet it, in its entirety, and that's *okay* if the spirit of the CoC is being defended. I am perfectly happy to keep "political beliefs" explicit in the CoC and still boot the neo-feudalist for making the project's/conference's environment unwelcoming for a more vulnerable group of people, even if just by their presence. I *am* sensitive to how nominally well-intentioned "viewpoint diversity" efforts get hijacked by regressives looking to (re)assert their traditional power. But that problem is mostly confined to conferences who need to seek speakers and has less relevance to numpy, which largely doesn't run much except sprints. I think we can resolve that elsewhere, if not another document, then at least another clause. A CoC has to pull a kind of double duty: be friendly enough to digest for a newcomer and also be helpful to project organizers to make tough balancing decisions. We don't have to expect each sentence to pull that double duty on its own. I don't quite know what the phrasing would be (because, again, we don't run conferences), but I think we could make a statement that explicitly disclaims that we will be using "viewpoint diversity" to provide a platform for viewpoints antithetical to the CoC.

None of these categorizations listed should be interpreted as get-out-of-jail-free cards for otherwise unwelcoming behavior, and I think maybe we should be explicit about that. Our diversity statement is an aspiration, not a suicide pact. Religion, neurotype, national origin, and subculture (4chan is a subculture, God help us), at minimum, are all items on that list that I have personally seen used to justify shitty behavior. Political belief is far from unique (nor the most common excuse, in my experience) in that list. But they all deserve to be on that list. I want the somewhat fringy progressive hacktivist to feel comfortable here as well as people more mainstream.

--
Robert Kern

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Adoption of a Code of Conduct

Sylvain Corlay
The "political belief" was recently removed from the Jupyter CoC.

One reason for this decision is that Racism and Sexism are increasingly considered as mainstream "political beliefs", and we wanted to make it clear that people can still be sanctioned for e.g. sexist or racist behavior when engaging with the project (at events, on the mailing list or GitHub...) even if their racism and sexism is corresponds to a "political belief".

It is still not OK for people to be excluded or discriminated against because of their political affiliation. The CoC statement reads "This includes, but is not limited to...". Also we don't wish to prioritize or elevate any members of a particular political belief to the same level as any members of the examples remaining in the documentUltimately, the CoC committee uses their own judgement to assess reports and the appropriate response.

Best,

Sylvain


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 7:04 AM, Robert Kern <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:35 PM Ryan May <[hidden email]> wrote:
When experts say that something is a bad idea, and when the people who
a CoC is supposed to protect says it makes them feel unsafe, I feel
like we should listen to that.

I also thought that the points made in the Jupyter discussion thread
made a lot of sense: of course it's possible for people to start
harassing each other over any excuse, and a CoC can, should, and does
make clear that that's not OK. But if you specifically *call out*
political affiliation as a protected class, at a time when lots of the
people who the CoC is trying to protect are facing governmental
harassment justified as "mere political disagreement", then it really
sends the wrong message.

Besides, uh... isn't the whole definition of politics that it's topics
where there is active debate? Not really sure why it's even in that
list to start with.

So I hear all the arguments about people feeling unsafe due to some truly despicable, discriminatory behavior, and I want absolutely no parts of protecting that. However, I also recognize that we in the U.S. are in a particularly divisive atmosphere, and people of varied political persuasions want absolutely nothing to do with those who share differing views. So, as a concrete example, if someone were to show up at a NumPy developer summit with a MAGA ("Make America Great Again") hat, or talks about their support for the president in non-numpy channels, WITHOUT expressing anything discriminatory or support for such views, if "political beliefs" is not in the CoC, is this person welcome? I'm not worried about my own views, but I have friends of widely varying views, and I truly wonder if they would be welcome. With differing "political beliefs" listed as something welcomed, I feel ok for them; if this language is removed, I'm much less certain.

IMO, "political beliefs" encompasses so much more things than a handful of very specific, hateful views. People can disagree about a wide array of "political beliefs" and it is important that we as a community welcome a wide array of such views. If the CoC needs to protect against the wide array of discriminatory views and behavior that make up U.S. politics right now, how about specifically calling those behaviors out as not-welcome, rather than completely ignoring the fact that 99% of "political beliefs" are perfectly welcome within the community?

The CoC is about spelling out the community norms--how about just spelling out that we welcome everyone, but, in the words of Will Wheaton, "Don't be a dick"?

I agree that it's worth clarifying in the text what this clause is intended to do. I think it has been misinterpreted as defining a legalistic set of protected classes along the lines of anti-discrimination laws and can be interpreted by itself outside of the context of the CoC as a whole. But it's not that. It's an aspirational statement, and a high one, at that, if we interpret it at its broadest. We will fail to meet it, in its entirety, and that's *okay* if the spirit of the CoC is being defended. I am perfectly happy to keep "political beliefs" explicit in the CoC and still boot the neo-feudalist for making the project's/conference's environment unwelcoming for a more vulnerable group of people, even if just by their presence. I *am* sensitive to how nominally well-intentioned "viewpoint diversity" efforts get hijacked by regressives looking to (re)assert their traditional power. But that problem is mostly confined to conferences who need to seek speakers and has less relevance to numpy, which largely doesn't run much except sprints. I think we can resolve that elsewhere, if not another document, then at least another clause. A CoC has to pull a kind of double duty: be friendly enough to digest for a newcomer and also be helpful to project organizers to make tough balancing decisions. We don't have to expect each sentence to pull that double duty on its own. I don't quite know what the phrasing would be (because, again, we don't run conferences), but I think we could make a statement that explicitly disclaims that we will be using "viewpoint diversity" to provide a platform for viewpoints antithetical to the CoC.

None of these categorizations listed should be interpreted as get-out-of-jail-free cards for otherwise unwelcoming behavior, and I think maybe we should be explicit about that. Our diversity statement is an aspiration, not a suicide pact. Religion, neurotype, national origin, and subculture (4chan is a subculture, God help us), at minimum, are all items on that list that I have personally seen used to justify shitty behavior. Political belief is far from unique (nor the most common excuse, in my experience) in that list. But they all deserve to be on that list. I want the somewhat fringy progressive hacktivist to feel comfortable here as well as people more mainstream.

--
Robert Kern

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
1234