Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 07 Mar 2018 23:30:23 -0500
From:      "Fiorello G. Baumgartner" <fiorello.g.baumgartner@protonmail.com>
To:        "freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org>, "developers@freebsd.org" <developers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Issues and proposed improvements to the FreeBSD CoC
Message-ID:  <XFsEQST34WnS9sM3m1UR1LfdhwU_pFHlHHYjQJujjstOdXe7vmTBi2kGC4piAX8Eg7OT-bWdJsghOWg6uUItL5k_tKCafLMXFF5wYbqwMP4=@protonmail.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello,

I am a long-time FreeBSD user who has observed much of the controversy arou=
nd the recently released CoC, and I would like to comment on it. While I do=
n=E2=80=99t oppose the concept of a CoC, I think the current revision has s=
ignificant issues that I think should be addressed and will outline here:=
=20

1. It unnecessarily wades into contentious political territory, for example=
 by using language characteristic of particular ideological factions that c=
ould be interpreted as endorsement of or indirect affiliation with those fa=
ctions. FreeBSD is a technical project, and it should endeavor to avoid pol=
itical entanglements that are far outside of its mission of developing an o=
pen source operating system. Such entanglements are a distraction and also =
exclusionary.

As an example of why this is a problem, the CoC committee could have releas=
ed a semantically similar document that used Christian terms and language t=
o communicate the same messages as the new CoC, and it=E2=80=99s obvious th=
at would have been unwise, controversial, and that non-Christians might tak=
e issue. It=E2=80=99s the same with this document. The CoC should be rewrit=
ten in the blandest, most uncontroversial language possible that communicat=
es the indented meaning.

Using different language would also have the benefit of making the document=
 easier for nonnative English speakers to understand, and spare them the ta=
sk of familiarizing themselves with the neologisms and jargon of a North Am=
erican political ideology.

2. The document text appears to have been presented as a fiat accompli to t=
he project. No drafts appear to have been widely circulated for feedback pr=
ior to release. For something as core to a community as how it should condu=
ct itself, this is unacceptable.

It appears that the reason for this is that the teams responsible judged it=
 as too difficult to gain consensus about the text from the wider project, =
so it opted to avoid that task. However, in a more democratic, collaborativ=
e project like FreeBSD this is a dereliction of duty. The political labor o=
f working towards a consensus is a burden of project leadership and must be=
 done.

To that end, the core team and the CoC committee should officially and open=
ly solicit feedback from the wider developer group on the present CoC, hone=
stly listen to that feedback, incorporate it into a new revision, and prese=
nt that revision for approval by the wider group. In the interests of openn=
ess and transparency, it=E2=80=99s preferable that the feedback not be pres=
ented privately and that discussions about it appear in the open for other =
project members to see.

3. This is a much more specific criticism, but the first example of harassm=
ent needs to be revised to not exclude so many groups. I suggest that examp=
le be replaced with the *exact text* used in the Geek Feminism CoC, which I=
=E2=80=99ll quote here:

> Offensive comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, sex=
ual orientation, disability, mental illness, neuro(a)typicality, physical a=
ppearance, body size, age, race, or religion.

I would also be fine if that was revised a little bit to =E2=80=9Coffensive=
 comments or comments that reinforce negative stereotypes,=E2=80=9D which m=
ay get more at the intent of the CoC committee's modifications.

The current language, which appears to be original to the FreeBSD CoC, spec=
ifically does not apply to harassing comments directed at many genders, sex=
ual orientations, races, religions, etc. due to its use of the term "system=
atic oppression." There=E2=80=99s been some speculation that =E2=80=9Charas=
sment includes but is not limited to=E2=80=9D covers such comments, but tha=
t=E2=80=99s unacceptably vague. It must be made *clear* that harassment inv=
olving *any* gender, race, religion, etc. is unacceptable.

This is a major defect that must be corrected. The sorts of harassing comme=
nts that the current text doesn=E2=80=99t explicitly forbid occur frequentl=
y on social media.

4. The attribution should either be removed or language added stating that =
FreeBSD does not endorse the viewpoint of =E2=80=9CGeek Feminism=E2=80=
=9D or its ideas; besides the ones it has explicitly borrowed. This is clos=
ely related to my point #1 above.

5. This is my least important comment, but the *hugs* example should be exc=
ised. This example is too-easily mocked and this kind of behavior is a good=
 example of the kind of thing that should be covered under =E2=80=9Charassm=
ent includes but is not limited to=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D

It=E2=80=99s puzzling why this example was included while the glaring defec=
ts in the example I covered in my point #3 were unaddressed.

6. The new CoC does not actually cover how one should conduct itself in the=
 project.  It's really just anti-harassment policy with some prefatory plat=
itudes about diversity and inclusion.  That's really lacking.

It should be revised to provide affirmative advice, not just negative examp=
les. This could include something like =E2=80=9CFreeBSD is a technical proj=
ect. It=E2=80=99s recommended that you focus on technical and project topic=
s in your interactions, and avoid other subjects.=E2=80=9D

In these regard, the original FreeBSD CoC was far better than the current r=
evision. It should be consulted and much of its language salvaged and incor=
porated into the new CoC. For reference, that version can be found here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20171222235533/https://www.freebsd.org/internal=
/code-of-conduct.html

7. Scope should be clarified and reasonable. The current phrasing of=
=E2=80=A6

> This code of conduct applies to all spaces used by the FreeBSD Project, i=
ncluding our mailing lists, IRC channels, and social media, both online and=
 off.

=E2=80=A6is too ambiguous and may be over-broad. For instance, if someone i=
s active on twitter, FreeBSD shouldn=E2=80=99t claim to be policing everyth=
ing they=E2=80=99ve ever said there to anyone, because FreeBSD once used tw=
itter. The risk I=E2=80=99m trying to avoid here is the kind of harassment =
where someone with a grudge goes on a dirt digging expedition in order to e=
xploit process.

----

These issues aren=E2=80=99t moot points. I=E2=80=99ve donated to the founda=
tion and for some time I=E2=80=99ve toyed with the idea of trying to volunt=
eer for the project, probably to help with scut-work due to the fact that m=
y skills aren=E2=80=99t very aligned with it (I=E2=80=99m not very handy wi=
th C, for instance). While I=E2=80=99ll continue to use FreeBSD, the introd=
uction of this revision of the CoC means that it=E2=80=99s unlikely that I=
=E2=80=99ll continue with my donations or attempt to volunteer unless the i=
ssues are addressed.

In short:

* The present CoC has numerous issues that were introduced by recent revisi=
on.  Those issues are both issues in an of themselves and the cause of dram=
a.  They need to be addressed.
* The issues should be addressed through an open, transparent process.  If =
this had been done initially, the the issues could have been dealt with ear=
ly and more easily.
* We should salvage language from the old CoC to address some of the proble=
ms of the new one.
* The CoC should endeavor, mightily, to accomplish its goals while avoiding=
, as much as possible, contemporary political controversy, controversial or=
 sectarian ideology, and controversial terminology.  Failure to do so will =
inevitably lead to unnecessary drama and distraction, which has been amply =
demonstrated by recent events.

Thanks,

- Fiorello G. Baumgartner, a pseudonymous FreeBSD user

----

P.S. Here=E2=80=99s a proposal for a revised list of examples (double-aster=
isks denote modifications).  I think we'd have a very good CoC if we took t=
he original FreeBSD one, and grafted on these examples and the reporting pr=
ocedures of the new CoC.

** Offensive comments or comments that reinforce negative stereotypes relat=
ed to any gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disab=
ility, mental illness, neuro(a)typicality, physical appearance, body size, =
age, race, or religion.

** Unwelcome comments regarding a person's lifestyle choices and practices,=
 including those related to food, health, parenting, non-disruptive drug us=
e, and employment.

** Deliberate and harassing use of rejected or unwanted names, nicknames, o=
r pronouns. In some cases these are called =E2=80=9Cdead names.=E2=80=9D

* Gratuitous or off-topic sexual images or behavior in spaces where they're=
 not appropriate.

** Physical contact without consent or after a request to stop.

** Threats of physical violence.

** Incitement of physical violence towards any individual, including encour=
aging a person to commit suicide or to engage in self-harm.

* Deliberate intimidation.

** Stalking or intrusive following.

* Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for=
 harassment purposes.

* Sustained disruption of discussion.

* Unwelcome sexual attention.

* Pattern of inappropriate social contact, such as requesting/assuming inap=
propriate levels of intimacy with others.

* Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease.

** Deliberate "outing" of any private aspect of a person's identity without=
 their consent except as necessary to protect people from intentional abuse=
.

** Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent, exce=
pt to reveal misconduct.

* Publication of non-harassing private communication with consent but in a =
way that intentionally misrepresents the communication (e.g., removes conte=
xt that changes the meaning).

* Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person.

----

P.P.S. On the pseudonym: I'm not going to wade into public, forever-archive=
d political debates under my real name.  People are weird and I would rathe=
r not chance the possibility of being stalked or harassed over this.

----

P.P.P.S  Thank you for reading this far.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFsEQST34WnS9sM3m1UR1LfdhwU_pFHlHHYjQJujjstOdXe7vmTBi2kGC4piAX8Eg7OT-bWdJsghOWg6uUItL5k_tKCafLMXFF5wYbqwMP4=>