You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@community.apache.org by Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> on 2016/11/08 20:58:43 UTC
Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Hi Everyone
It's been a while since my last update as I've been away. I'm now starting to pick things up again so please see below for a brief update.
*Women in Big Data*
The WIBD group asked for a speaker to present to their members in the San Francisco area. Kathy Saunders responded and this event is being called An Evening with the Apache Software Foundation - \u201cThe Benefits of Being Open\u201d
It has been changed from a presentation to a panel discussion made up of 3 female ASF committers. The event will take place tomorrow 9th November 2016 and details can be found here.
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-benefits-of-being-open-tickets-28846382306
Good luck with the event and I'll try and get some feedback on it as another event may be planned if this one is successful.
*Dataworks Summit 2017*
I've had are request about the Dataworks Summit 2017 in Munich. Their CFP is open and they are wanting to attract more women to this event so would like to encourage them to submit speaking proposals.
The deadline for submissions is 11th November.
http://dataworkssummit.com/munich-2017/
*Hackbright Academy*
Luciano Resende kindly volunteered to do a presentation for the Hackbright Academy in San Francisco. I don't think that this talk has been organised yet so am following up with them about it.
*Committer Survey*
Thanks to everyone that has given me feedback, ideas and general comments on this. I now have the final version of the survey prepared and ready to send out to the committers mailing list. We are in the process of setting up some LDAP authentication to ensure that only committers can access the survey weblink.
One of the main concerns about the survey was privacy so the survey itself will be completely anonymous.
Almost all of the responses will be consolidated and reported as statistics, however there is one question where the person taking the survey can give an opinion or enter comments. As quotes can sometimes be very useful, (especially if we are seeing common themes), I have added a section for the person to give their permission (or not) for us to quote their comments from this question. We still won't know who the person is, only that we can quote them if they say 'Yes'.
I'm hoping that the survey can go out this week. It will run for 2 weeks so we will be collecting responses during Apachecon EU and maybe able to provide some snapshot data at the conference. Based on this timing we are hoping to have the full set of results available by the end of November.
*General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the results.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about ways to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage diversity.
Please feel free to let me have any feedback, comments and ideas.
Thanks
Sharan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Joan Touzet <wo...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...I will note that CouchDB's Code of Conduct came first, and in fact was
> the model for the Apache Code of Conduct...
Yes, sorry that I omitted to mention that - big thanks to CouchDB for this!
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Joan Touzet <wo...@apache.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bd...@apache.org>
>
> Note that in the meantime there's
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct - IMO it's better
> if projects use that one, and if needed contribute improvements to
> it.
I will note that CouchDB's Code of Conduct came first, and in fact was
the model for the Apache Code of Conduct. However I agree with Bertrand's
implication: the Apache community at large falls under the (now-in-place)
Apache CoC.
-Joan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Some things we did on CouchDB...
>... - Create a Code of Conduct...
Note that in the meantime there's
https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct - IMO it's better
if projects use that one, and if needed contribute improvements to it.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Some things we did on CouchDB that I think could work for other projects:
- Started a lot of discussions (some private, some public) regarding
people's conduct on IRC, bug trackers, mailing lists etc (moving people to
a more "yes, and" culture, encouraging friendly and open communication,
particularly from people with a lot of visibility and reputation in the
project)
- Pushing for an "it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to ask for
permission" culture
- Create a diversity statement (communicates to potential community members
what our values are)
- Create a Code of Conduct (communicates that we're serious about
protecting people)
- Create a set of bylaws (communicates the project power structure and how
to gain access to it)
- Explicitly (via bylaws and project mailing list creation and other
activities and communications) recognise merit in *non-technical*
contributions (for example, marketing, community development, design)
I see that a lot of this is already covered by your notes!
On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 at 21:58 Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Everyone
>
> It's been a while since my last update as I've been away. I'm now starting
> to pick things up again so please see below for a brief update.
>
> *Women in Big Data*
> The WIBD group asked for a speaker to present to their members in the San
> Francisco area. Kathy Saunders responded and this event is being called An
> Evening with the Apache Software Foundation - “The Benefits of Being Open”
>
> It has been changed from a presentation to a panel discussion made up of 3
> female ASF committers. The event will take place tomorrow 9th November 2016
> and details can be found here.
>
> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-benefits-of-being-open-tickets-28846382306
>
> Good luck with the event and I'll try and get some feedback on it as
> another event may be planned if this one is successful.
>
> *Dataworks Summit 2017*
> I've had are request about the Dataworks Summit 2017 in Munich. Their CFP
> is open and they are wanting to attract more women to this event so would
> like to encourage them to submit speaking proposals.
>
> The deadline for submissions is 11th November.
>
> http://dataworkssummit.com/munich-2017/
>
> *Hackbright Academy*
> Luciano Resende kindly volunteered to do a presentation for the Hackbright
> Academy in San Francisco. I don't think that this talk has been organised
> yet so am following up with them about it.
>
> *Committer Survey*
> Thanks to everyone that has given me feedback, ideas and general comments
> on this. I now have the final version of the survey prepared and ready to
> send out to the committers mailing list. We are in the process of setting
> up some LDAP authentication to ensure that only committers can access the
> survey weblink.
>
> One of the main concerns about the survey was privacy so the survey itself
> will be completely anonymous.
>
> Almost all of the responses will be consolidated and reported as
> statistics, however there is one question where the person taking the
> survey can give an opinion or enter comments. As quotes can sometimes be
> very useful, (especially if we are seeing common themes), I have added a
> section for the person to give their permission (or not) for us to quote
> their comments from this question. We still won't know who the person is,
> only that we can quote them if they say 'Yes'.
>
> I'm hoping that the survey can go out this week. It will run for 2 weeks
> so we will be collecting responses during Apachecon EU and maybe able to
> provide some snapshot data at the conference. Based on this timing we are
> hoping to have the full set of results available by the end of November.
>
> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer
> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the results.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
>
> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about ways
> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage diversity.
>
> Please feel free to let me have any feedback, comments and ideas.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Joseph Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
Again this is not the world we occupy. There is no litmus test for who can join our lists and participate. Safety remains a priority that needs to be addressed- not for the majority, but for those occasional cases where it can and does take place here.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 14, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Matthew Sacks <ma...@matthewsacks.com> wrote:
>
> Please forgive my ignorance on the matter, but isn't this a prestigious
> Open Source software Foundation?
>
> For such top engineers you think you would have less safety concerns.
> Perhaps this is the Linux foundation's influence on the ASF?
>
> Perhaps Schneier can comment on your seeming "Culture of Fear" if he even
> bothers with this list.
>
> -M
>
>
>
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
>> on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
>> treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
>> health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
>>
>> Positioning *war* as the canonical example of un-safety is a poor one.
>> There are many forms of safety. Feeling like a community is a good place
>> for you to inhabit, feeling like it wont harm you (emotionally, mentally,
>> or otherwise) is well within the remit of safety that we, as a
>> community-focused org, should be concerned about.
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 10:32 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
>>>>> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the
>>> committer
>>>>> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the
>>> results.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
>>>>> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about
>>> ways
>>>>> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage
>>> diversity.
>>>
>>> <snip/>
>>>
>>>> So; What does "feel safe" mean?
>>>> In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt
>>> that
>>>> you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location
>>> is
>>>> known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or
>>> indirectly
>>>> causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent
>> danger
>>>> to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy
>>> also
>>>> includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our
>> survival.
>>>> "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and
>> other
>>>> non-sense.
>>>> If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine
>>> that
>>>> anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
>>>
>>> Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
>>> directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
>>> of them.
>>>
>>> I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
>>> of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
>>> desired outcomes and should remain.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Matthew Sacks <ma...@matthewsacks.com>.
Please forgive my ignorance on the matter, but isn't this a prestigious
Open Source software Foundation?
For such top engineers you think you would have less safety concerns.
Perhaps this is the Linux foundation's influence on the ASF?
Perhaps Schneier can comment on your seeming "Culture of Fear" if he even
bothers with this list.
-M
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
> on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
> treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
> health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
>
> Positioning *war* as the canonical example of un-safety is a poor one.
> There are many forms of safety. Feeling like a community is a good place
> for you to inhabit, feeling like it wont harm you (emotionally, mentally,
> or otherwise) is well within the remit of safety that we, as a
> community-focused org, should be concerned about.
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 10:32 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> > >> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the
> > committer
> > >> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the
> > results.
> > >>
> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
> > >> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
> > >>
> > >> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about
> > ways
> > >> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage
> > diversity.
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > > So; What does "feel safe" mean?
> > > In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt
> > that
> > > you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location
> > is
> > > known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or
> > indirectly
> > > causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent
> danger
> > > to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy
> > also
> > > includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our
> survival.
> > > "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and
> other
> > > non-sense.
> > > If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine
> > that
> > > anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
> >
> > Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
> > directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
> > of them.
> >
> > I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
> > of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
> > desired outcomes and should remain.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>
wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>
> wrote:
> ...
> > First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
> > you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
> > others!
> ...
>
> +1.
>
> We have at least three ComDev PMC members who are interested in doing
> this work, so I'm glad to see it move forward. General complaints don't
> help, and often harm. Specific patches or changes with consensus behind
> them that help the work move forward would be appreciated.
(Sorry, I don't know how to submit a diff for Confluence)
Proposed change (somewhat overlapping with content in CoC, but spelled out);
Ensure that people that join Apache communities enjoy what they do and feel
safe and appreciated
1. Make existing contributors and all new contributors feel safe
(IMPORTANT!)
1. Have a Code of Conduct
2. Ensure the code of conduct is enforced
Actively work towards improvement of Apache communities, so the
participants enjoy what they do and feel appreciated
1. Make existing and new contributors enjoy the Apache communities, in a
friendly, inclusive and collaborative atmosphere
1. Keep a Code of Conduct as a living document, outlining acceptable and
unacceptable behavior
2. Promote the Code of Conduct as a tool to educate the participants
in our communities, promote its applicability and encourage community
members to speak up when Code of Conduct is not adhered to.
3. Promote and encourage the use of a well-understood process to
escalate unacceptable behavior, if subject not correcting such behavior.
4. Being vigilant against personal attacks, name calling and similar
acts.
5. Provide a guide that outlines recommended responses to
unacceptable behavior of different kinds.
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Matthew Sacks <ma...@matthewsacks.com>.
Al i on the right mailing list?
This is Dev, right?
On Tuesday, November 15, 2016, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Shane Curcuru <asf@shanecurcuru.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
> >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> ...
> >>> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
> >>> you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
> >>> others!
> >> ...
> >>
> >> +1.
> >>
> >> We have at least three ComDev PMC members who are interested in doing
> >> this work, so I'm glad to see it move forward. General complaints don't
> >> help, and often harm. Specific patches or changes with consensus behind
> >> them that help the work move forward would be appreciated.
> >
> > Taking yours and Sam's "then don't participate"-style responses, one
> > might conclude that diversity is desirable only when folks are of like
> > mind, which kinda defeats the point.
>
> I don't care for that characterization of my point of view. I believe
> that diversity is something we should seek out, it makes us stronger
> and more resilient.
>
> I merely acknowledge that not everybody shares my point of view on this
> subject.
>
> > The original feedback wasn't general complaints, it was a specific
> > question: "what does feel safe mean?" It's a reasonable question,
> > even if there was some over-use of hyperbole. He ended with a
> > paragraph like, "now, if this is what you mean...I'm fine with it" On
> > any other topic, I feel like most folks around here would assume
> > positive intent and try to understand the perspective.
>
> I also have had experience with not feeling "safe" here. It was not a
> matter of a physical threat, but it was a very credible threat by an
> individual who was more than capable of following through. I'm not
> willing to share more on a publicly archived list. Those who are ASF
> members can find out more by going to the following link:
> https://s.apache.org/R5sk; for those who are impatient, scroll down to
> the P.S..
>
> I dare anybody who can stomach reading that to say "I might pity you
> for being too sensitive, but...".
>
> > Thanks,
> > --tim
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> <javascript:;>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> <javascript:;>
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>> Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>> ...
>>> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
>>> you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
>>> others!
>> ...
>>
>> +1.
>>
>> We have at least three ComDev PMC members who are interested in doing
>> this work, so I'm glad to see it move forward. General complaints don't
>> help, and often harm. Specific patches or changes with consensus behind
>> them that help the work move forward would be appreciated.
>
> Taking yours and Sam's "then don't participate"-style responses, one
> might conclude that diversity is desirable only when folks are of like
> mind, which kinda defeats the point.
I don't care for that characterization of my point of view. I believe
that diversity is something we should seek out, it makes us stronger
and more resilient.
I merely acknowledge that not everybody shares my point of view on this subject.
> The original feedback wasn't general complaints, it was a specific
> question: "what does feel safe mean?" It's a reasonable question,
> even if there was some over-use of hyperbole. He ended with a
> paragraph like, "now, if this is what you mean...I'm fine with it" On
> any other topic, I feel like most folks around here would assume
> positive intent and try to understand the perspective.
I also have had experience with not feeling "safe" here. It was not a
matter of a physical threat, but it was a very credible threat by an
individual who was more than capable of following through. I'm not
willing to share more on a publicly archived list. Those who are ASF
members can find out more by going to the following link:
https://s.apache.org/R5sk; for those who are impatient, scroll down to
the P.S..
I dare anybody who can stomach reading that to say "I might pity you
for being too sensitive, but...".
> Thanks,
> --tim
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> ...
>> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
>> you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
>> others!
> ...
>
> +1.
>
> We have at least three ComDev PMC members who are interested in doing
> this work, so I'm glad to see it move forward. General complaints don't
> help, and often harm. Specific patches or changes with consensus behind
> them that help the work move forward would be appreciated.
Taking yours and Sam's "then don't participate"-style responses, one
might conclude that diversity is desirable only when folks are of like
mind, which kinda defeats the point.
The original feedback wasn't general complaints, it was a specific
question: "what does feel safe mean?" It's a reasonable question,
even if there was some over-use of hyperbole. He ended with a
paragraph like, "now, if this is what you mean...I'm fine with it" On
any other topic, I feel like most folks around here would assume
positive intent and try to understand the perspective.
Thanks,
--tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote on 11/15/16 3:41 PM:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
...
> First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
> you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
> others!
...
+1.
We have at least three ComDev PMC members who are interested in doing
this work, so I'm glad to see it move forward. General complaints don't
help, and often harm. Specific patches or changes with consensus behind
them that help the work move forward would be appreciated.
- Shane
P.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> Noah,
> ASF has not gotten to where it is by generalizations and abstractions of
> nonexistent issues. Whenever anyone brings up a hypothetical, be it in
> Legal or Membership quorums, the response is that we deal with it when
> there are actual usecases.
I am one who also prefers actual usecases. Sadly, they are all too
easy to be found.
> I am asking for examples, some type of record to consume to form myself an
> opinion of whether anything new is needed. If such pragmatism hurts your
> feelings, well... I might pity you for being too sensitive, but it is not
> an argument and you are not convincing me of anything.
I'd like to flip that around.
First, if you are not convinced, don't participate. All we ask is that
you don't actively prevent others from doing so. Go Sharan and
others!
Second, our goal here is to build communities. A vital part of that
goal is to make people feel welcome, or at the very least not push
them away.
Third, it is my observation that once someone injects "take offense"
into the conversation, they are looking at the problem in the wrong
way. If you take offense, that is at least in part your problem. If
we don't take steps to make you feel welcome, then that is our
failing.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Peter Hunsberger <pe...@gmail.com>.
The multiple perspectives on this topic all seem to have some
validity. However, I do think we can do better at making people feel
comfortable with the Apache culture. For the large part Apache has a
lot of well established members who are experts in many topic areas
and well versed in the Apache way. For a new comer, entry into this
culture is often not a very welcoming experience. People using the
wrong terminology perceive that they are being told that they need to
learn the culture or they needn't bother to tread on our turf. People
with ideas that have already been tried perceive that they are being
told "been there, done that, go away". I'm pretty sure that this is
largely the result of the isolation from direct contact that mailing
lists entail. Over the years, the most important thing I've learned is
that one should always sit on any reactive response to any individual
for at least several hours before hitting send. So, to the extent
that we can create verbiage that teaches people how to be considerate
in an online community I'm all for it. Telling someone to be kind
doesn't generally work, few people are trying to be mean. Telling
someone how to be kind might get some traction.
Peter Hunsberger
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/15/16, 9:03 AM, "Patricia Shanahan" <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>>That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
>>write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
>>in e-mails.
>
> Personally, I don't think "rules", "standards" and "policies" are in play
> here. The CoC describes what is truly out-of-bounds, but I generally
> agree with Noah that there is a lot of stuff that is in-bounds that still
> makes participating at Apache an uncomfortable and/or unhappy experience.
> But I can't imagine ever achieving consensus on codifying what that is.
>
> I don't think most cultures ever do codify such a thing. I haven't seen a
> set of rules for the US or Japan. I think cultures socially encourage and
> discourage certain behavior to reach a certain result. I would like to
> welcome Noah back, and am saddened that some of these emails could easily
> be seen as unwelcoming by many people, including myself. Apache mailing
> lists often feel like one of those bars in the rough part of town that I
> am too chicken to go into. Obviously, enough people frequent those bars
> to keep them in business so they aren't violating any rules. I just wish
> Apache mailing lists were more like family-friendly restaurants. If an
> 11-year-old hot-shot coder wanted to participate in an ASF project, I
> would feel compelled to warn them and his/her parents that the tone on
> many mailing lists is not family-friendly. I wish I didn't feel that way.
> I don't understand why it has to be this way.
>
> -Alex
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Not sure how we got here. I wasn't suggesting we update our code of conduct.
Niclas was attacking the concept of "safety", so I was providing a concrete
example of someone (me) who does not feel safe.
Niclas’s response is an example of the sort of thing that has contributed
to me not feeling safe around here. And I believe the existing code of
conduct already covers what happened on this thread (broadly) in point two
("Be empathetic, welcoming, friendly, and patient.") and five ("Be careful
in the words that we choose.”).
Niclas wants to know what we mean by "safe".
I will feel "safe" in this community when I feel like the people here care
about me and will treat me with empathy and kindness.
But that''s a symptom of a healthy community with healthy interactions.
Nobody want's to "enforce happiness".
But it would be nice if we got to the point where, for example, the
community did not tolerate the dismissal of people's experiences as
hypothetical non-issues that require detailed documentary evidence to be
presented to anyone who asks for it every time anything is mentioned, even
in passing, lest the person be accused of of being a "social justice
warrior" "breeding" a "cry-baby and victimhood culture".
Like, you realise how defensive and resistant to introspection and change
this makes us look as a group of people?
We don't learn how to improve by making sure that anybody with the info and
experiences we could learn from don't feel comfortable speaking.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 18:30 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/15/16, 9:03 AM, "Patricia Shanahan" <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> >That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
> >write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
> >in e-mails.
>
> Personally, I don't think "rules", "standards" and "policies" are in play
> here. The CoC describes what is truly out-of-bounds, but I generally
> agree with Noah that there is a lot of stuff that is in-bounds that still
> makes participating at Apache an uncomfortable and/or unhappy experience.
> But I can't imagine ever achieving consensus on codifying what that is.
>
> I don't think most cultures ever do codify such a thing. I haven't seen a
> set of rules for the US or Japan. I think cultures socially encourage and
> discourage certain behavior to reach a certain result. I would like to
> welcome Noah back, and am saddened that some of these emails could easily
> be seen as unwelcoming by many people, including myself. Apache mailing
> lists often feel like one of those bars in the rough part of town that I
> am too chicken to go into. Obviously, enough people frequent those bars
> to keep them in business so they aren't violating any rules. I just wish
> Apache mailing lists were more like family-friendly restaurants. If an
> 11-year-old hot-shot coder wanted to participate in an ASF project, I
> would feel compelled to warn them and his/her parents that the tone on
> many mailing lists is not family-friendly. I wish I didn't feel that way.
> I don't understand why it has to be this way.
>
> -Alex
>
>
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 11/15/16, 9:03 AM, "Patricia Shanahan" <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
>write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
>in e-mails.
Personally, I don't think "rules", "standards" and "policies" are in play
here. The CoC describes what is truly out-of-bounds, but I generally
agree with Noah that there is a lot of stuff that is in-bounds that still
makes participating at Apache an uncomfortable and/or unhappy experience.
But I can't imagine ever achieving consensus on codifying what that is.
I don't think most cultures ever do codify such a thing. I haven't seen a
set of rules for the US or Japan. I think cultures socially encourage and
discourage certain behavior to reach a certain result. I would like to
welcome Noah back, and am saddened that some of these emails could easily
be seen as unwelcoming by many people, including myself. Apache mailing
lists often feel like one of those bars in the rough part of town that I
am too chicken to go into. Obviously, enough people frequent those bars
to keep them in business so they aren't violating any rules. I just wish
Apache mailing lists were more like family-friendly restaurants. If an
11-year-old hot-shot coder wanted to participate in an ASF project, I
would feel compelled to warn them and his/her parents that the tone on
many mailing lists is not family-friendly. I wish I didn't feel that way.
I don't understand why it has to be this way.
-Alex
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously
write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables
in e-mails.
On 11/15/2016 8:56 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> What I am looking for is an example of behavior that is permitted by the
> current code of conduct but that could be prohibited by a practical,
> enforceable set of rules.
>
> On 11/15/2016 8:28 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
>> this context.
>>
>> We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread
>> already. I
>> was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to
>> provide
>> proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
>> cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>>
>> Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
>> community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this
>> sort of
>> thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
>>
>> As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any
>> concrete
>> point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
>> Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
>>
>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
>>> list,
>>>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
>>>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>>>>
>>>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to
>>>> the
>>>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
>>> wanted
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to
>>>> even
>>>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
>>> me,
>>>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
>>> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
>>> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
>>> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>>>
>>> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
>>> mailing list and topic?
>>>
>>> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
>>> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>>>
>>> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
>>> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
>>> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
>>> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
>>> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
What I am looking for is an example of behavior that is permitted by the
current code of conduct but that could be prohibited by a practical,
enforceable set of rules.
On 11/15/2016 8:28 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
> this context.
>
> We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread already. I
> was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to provide
> proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
> cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>
> Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
> community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this sort of
> thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
>
> As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any concrete
> point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
> Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> ...
>>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
>> list,
>>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
>>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>>>
>>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to the
>>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
>> wanted
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to even
>>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
>> me,
>>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
>> ...
>>
>> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
>> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
>> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
>> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>>
>> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
>> mailing list and topic?
>>
>> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
>> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>>
>> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
>> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
>> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
>> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
>> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> And FTR, yes, I am obviously incredulous and ignorant enough to not see how
> any mechanism in the ASF setup causes or encourages bad behavior from
> individuals.
I do *NOT* believe that anybody has stated that. I certainly didn't.
Misstating others positions is counterproductive.
> Shane asked me to not stand in the way[1] of people who wants to improve
> diversity, but I am concerned about that _enforcement_ of a Code of Conduct
> will be overused. Yes, I realize that is also without usecases, but Noah
> stated that I am (by asking for some examples) an example of not "feeling
> safe" and I imply from that this _enforcement_ could (maybe should) be
> struck down on me over this very thread, rather than educate me of what is
> so "thoroughly horrible". The "assume the best intentions" attitude seems
> to be slowly replaced by a "assume the worst intentions", and I think that
> too is worrisome, especially with an "enforcement", rather than
> "education", "promotion" and "leading by example" language in Sharan's
> proposal.
You correctly state that your concern is without use cases.
Recapping: the ASF does not cause bad behavior. However as bad
behavior has and will continue to occur despite this, and as that bad
behavior harms our mission, it is the ASF's best interest to not
tolerate that behavior.
No set of rules will capture every possible bad behavior that could
possibly occur. The most that we can do is state that such behavior
will not be tolerated, and to follow through.
Just like you have asked of others, I ask that you judge those that do
so based on actual enforcement, not based on your own personal worst
fears and interpretations of their intent. If a Code of Conduct is
overused, please speak up. Until that occurs (and every evidence we
have is that we collectively have taken great pains NOT to do so),
please respect that there is a very real problem that needs to be
addressed.
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
> [1] A really terrible argument, since you (Shane) would not have that
> attitude for a proposal to allow for GPL'd projects in the ASF. "Don't
> stand in the way for people who wants to improve licensing diversity...
> enforce the right to release under multiple licenses...".
And that is a really terrible attempt to describe a situation that
isn't remotely parallel to the topic at hand.
- Sam Ruby
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 15/11/2016 17:28, Noah Slater wrote:
>> > What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
>> > this context.
>> >
>> > We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread
>> already. I
>> > was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to
>> provide
>> > proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
>> > cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>> >
>> > Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
>> > community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this sort
>> of
>> > thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
>> >
>> > As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any
>> concrete
>> > point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
>> > Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
>>
>> I received a similar off-list e-mail and while the impression I got was
>> of a general tone of incredulity, I'm prepared to give Niclas the
>> benefit of the doubt and assume it was a poorly worded email and he is
>> trying to better understand something he has never experienced.
>>
>> To summarise what happened in my case:
>>
>> - A list member launched an islamophobic attack on another list member
>> that was way, way over the line (no need to look for it in the archives,
>> it was removed within minutes).
>>
>> - I responded saying such behaviour was completely unacceptable and that
>> I was removing that person from the mailing list.
>>
>> - I then received a series of e-mails over about 24 hours (it might have
>> been less - it was a while ago) that threatened me and my family.
>>
>> - Because I am involved in infra, I was able to to remove the original
>> email from the archives and ensure that the person making the threats
>> was not subscribed to any other ASF lists.
>>
>> - I took the threats seriously enough that I considered cancelling my
>> trip to an upcoming ApacheCon.
>>
>> - I contacted the ASF President who advised I contact local law
>> enforcement and who contacted the ASF lawyers for advice.
>>
>> - I reported the threats to local law enforcement and also my employer
>> (for various reasons including that I might need to cancel the trip they
>> had already paid for).
>>
>> - Local law enforcement responded that - due to the cross-border nature
>> of the threats and the unknown identity of the person threatening me -
>> they weren't going to do anything. In short, they'd need to jump through
>> lots of legal hoops to make progress and the threshold for doing so was
>> somewhere around the level of terrorism and the threats to me and my
>> family fell short of that. I wasn't particularly surprised at this.
>>
>> - I did some digging of my own and while I couldn't track down an ID, I
>> had enough of an idea about location that I concluded that the
>> likelihood of the person turning up at ApacheCon was very low so I went
>> ahead with my trip. I did however, take care to ensure I was with a
>> group of people as much as possible.
>>
>> Generally, I felt it was handled well by the ASF. It helped that I could
>> do most things that required concrete action myself because of my
>> involvement with infra.
>>
>> In terms of where there is scope for improvement, I think we need to
>> make list moderators more aware of the CoC and their options when there
>> are posts that go against the CoC. I also think we need to make our
>> communities in general more aware of the CoC and what to do if they have
>> concerns.
>>
>> Whether we need to formally document how to respond when people report
>> CoC issues is TBD. They are rare enough (I'm one of the PoCs and I
>> haven't received a report yet) that I don't have enough data to
>> determine if there is sufficient commonality for any sort of documented
>> process or whether each needs a custom approach. Someone like Ross who
>> has dealt with more of these is probably in a better position to comment.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
>> >> list,
>> >>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
>> >>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>> >>>
>> >>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to
>> the
>> >>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
>> >> wanted
>> >>> it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to
>> even
>> >>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
>> >> me,
>> >>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
>> >> ...
>> >>
>> >> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
>> >> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
>> >> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
>> >> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>> >>
>> >> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
>> >> mailing list and topic?
>> >>
>> >> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
>> >> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>> >>
>> >> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
>> >> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
>> >> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
>> >> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
>> >> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
Sam,
you are conflating the concerns. This is not ON/OFF logic, with a possibly
more than one dimension of shading and positioning one (relatively extreme)
case as the norm for how to interact, is not the way to deal with this.
(analogy; "Person killed in traffic. Ban all cars.")
Niclas
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > 3. IGNORE IT
> >
> > You don't have to read what other people write, you don't have to
> > internalize it and you may convince others to do the same. For 20 years,
> > this was the number one defense against trolls and poisonous people.
>
> Strongly disagree.
>
> I want an ASF that grows communities.
>
> This is not to be accomplished by giving trolls and poisonous people
> an unchecked playground to perform whatever mischief satisfies
> whatever internal urge they have. And to tell the targets of this
> individual to just ignore it.
>
> I provided a link previously describing an experience I had. I hope
> that you can appreciate that "just ignore it" was not the right advice
> for that situation.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Agreed with Sam.
Saying "ignore it" ensures our communities will only be made up of people
who are hardy enough or privileged enough to be able to ignore such things.
We're not enforcing people's feelings of safety. Nor are we enforcing
people's happiness. Of course, we could never do that. They are subjective.
And we'll never be perfect. People are eventually gonna have a bad time at
the ASF. It's unavoidable. The same is true for any group of people lager
than one.
Our goal is to develop, document, and promote a set of community standards
that have the best possible chance of ensuring that the most amount of
people have the best time possible contributing here.
Sam's description of hesitating before he opened his Apache email resonated
with me so much. It's really quite upsetting that I've been in that same
place multiple times. Because of the sorts of interactions I've had here.
That's what I mean when I talk about my feelings of safety. "Is this place
good for my emotional health?"
Yes this is squishy and subjective and hard to define. But it's still
important. Because if the answer to that question isn't a resounding "YES"
we are failing at our primary mission.
> no one have tried to "work with me to help me understand why it wasn't
acceptable"
I tried, I think.
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 at 02:46 Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > 3. IGNORE IT
> >
> > You don't have to read what other people write, you don't have to
> > internalize it and you may convince others to do the same. For 20 years,
> > this was the number one defense against trolls and poisonous people.
>
> Strongly disagree.
>
> I want an ASF that grows communities.
>
> This is not to be accomplished by giving trolls and poisonous people
> an unchecked playground to perform whatever mischief satisfies
> whatever internal urge they have. And to tell the targets of this
> individual to just ignore it.
>
> I provided a link previously describing an experience I had. I hope
> that you can appreciate that "just ignore it" was not the right advice
> for that situation.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> 3. IGNORE IT
>
> You don't have to read what other people write, you don't have to
> internalize it and you may convince others to do the same. For 20 years,
> this was the number one defense against trolls and poisonous people.
Strongly disagree.
I want an ASF that grows communities.
This is not to be accomplished by giving trolls and poisonous people
an unchecked playground to perform whatever mischief satisfies
whatever internal urge they have. And to tell the targets of this
individual to just ignore it.
I provided a link previously describing an experience I had. I hope
that you can appreciate that "just ignore it" was not the right advice
for that situation.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 6:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Okay, back to the topic.
>
Ok, good.
> Perhaps we should update the code of conduct. It seems that a lot of the
> unease here relates to the nature of our planned responses to conduct
> infractions.
>
That is one part, the second is something I still don't fully grasp, which
is the "feel safe". I want to feel safe that it is Ok to have a differing
opinion, even if that differing opinion is that feeling safe is highly
subjective and is difficult to hold to somewhat consistent standards. This
simple statement, makes this an impossible proposition.
> There are two types of response:
>
> 1. Restorative justice
>
> This is where we speak to the person who violated one of our community
> standards. We tell them that what they did was not acceptable. Sometimes
> this is enough. They apologise and things are fixed.
>
I am sure that this is relatively common. And that is great.
> Sometimes they don't, and you need to work with them to help them
> understand why it wasn't acceptable. Sometimes you need to work with the
> person or people who were affected. Sometimes you need to undo the damage
> that wad done.
>
So, "this thread being an example", I don't "get" that I have violated any
community standards, and no one have tried to "work with me to help me
understand why it wasn't acceptable", and possibly I will never understand
it... where do you go from there?
2. Punitive justice
>
> This is where the violation was so severe, or the person is so resistant to
> change, that you have to take some sort of measure by force.
Ok, that has happen previously in ASF, and justifiably so in those cases
that I have heard of.
> It should go without saying that this should always be the last step.
>
Great, I agree.
> (In the past I have erred on the side of being too patient with people who
> are clearly not willing to change. Keeping people like that around can
> really damage a community.)
>
And you left out (perhaps unaware of if) the best tool that I use to
filter my life from things that damage my feelings;
3. IGNORE IT
You don't have to read what other people write, you don't have to
internalize it and you may convince others to do the same. For 20 years,
this was the number one defense against trolls and poisonous people. It is
also my own defense against racism (yeah, I am on the receiving end), if I
get affected, then they won!
This is of course not the proper track when personal attacks and name
calling is going on (for which your 1. and 2. are logical), but I get the
impression that a wider net (feel safe) is being laid here, and hence why I
propose the change (I would like a comment on that) in Sharan's page.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Okay, back to the topic.
Perhaps we should update the code of conduct. It seems that a lot of the
unease here relates to the nature of our planned responses to conduct
infractions.
I can tell you how I see it, as one of the people behind the work that went
into our code of conduct.
There are two types of response:
1. Restorative justice
This is where we speak to the person who violated one of our community
standards. We tell them that what they did was not acceptable. Sometimes
this is enough. They apologise and things are fixed.
Sometimes they don't, and you need to work with them to help them
understand why it wasn't acceptable. Sometimes you need to work with the
person or people who were affected. Sometimes you need to undo the damage
that wad done.
This is laborious work. I should know. A good chunk of the time and energy
I put into CouchDB was precisely this sort of thing. I used to think of it
as "emotional tanking", if you're familiar the gaming definition of that
word.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_(gaming)
2. Punitive justice
This is where the violation was so severe, or the person is so resistant to
change, that you have to take some sort of measure by force. This might be
the removal of someone's membership, removal from a PMC, revocation of
committer privileges, removal from a list, ban from an IRC channel,
whatever.
It should go without saying that this should always be the last step.
(In the past I have erred on the side of being too patient with people who
are clearly not willing to change. Keeping people like that around can
really damage a community.)
Anyway. This distinction between restorative justice and punitive justice
is just my own personal model. I can't say it's shared by the other people
behind the code of conduct. Though having worked with Joan now for many
years on CouchDB, I would be surprised if she didn't at least thin
something approximately similar.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 at 23:53 Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> This is the last email I am going to send on the specifics of me not
> liking the response I got on this thread. I have a follow-up email that
> will hopefully get us back on topic.
>
> Here's an excerpt of what you chose to email me privately:
>
> > Now, you have claimed that you have been suffering from prejudice and
> discrimination in the past, but I have no recollection of actual examples,
> where there really was an unacceptable behavior conducted AND that there
> were no repercussions from the ASF. Without examples, you are making
> unsubstantiated claims and hypotheticals, and those are really hard to
> discuss, due the the vagueness and rhetoric that accompanies those. With a
> public record, where you can point at "Look, here.... this... that... and X
> said, and Y defended..." then that is something you can use to convince me
> that this is not about a cry-baby and victimhood culture that people are
> trying to breed at ASF, with the silent support of those who are scared of
> speaking up against it, because they don't want to be cast in unfavorable
> light.
>
> "you have claimed"
> "I have no recollection of actual examples"
> "you are making unsubstantiated claims and hypotheticals"
>
> I'm reporting on my feelings. They're not "unsubstantiated claims" because
> I don't need to substantiate my emotions. If I tell you I had a bad time,
> you ought to just accept it. They're certainly not hypotheticals either. I
> wish.
>
> Do you see how this language you've chosen, and indeed the approach you've
> taken, contribute to the invalidation of my emotional and psychological
> state?
>
> You make it clear that unless I convince you, personally, that I am right
> to feel the way I feel, you will categorise the act of sharing my feelings
> an attempt to spread a "cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>
> This is not the way we should be responding to people who are saying "I
> had a bad time".
>
> Maybe if someone was saying "I had a bad time, so take these specific
> punitive measures against these specific people". Then we would want to
> collect documentary evidence. We'd want to understand the ins and the outs
> of the situation. But that would fall to the appropriate group of people,
> who would want to do it sensitively, and in private.
>
> Emailing random people you've seen posting on a mailing list about having
> a bad time and challenging them to justify themselves to you is not okay
> behaviour. But I am going to stop talking about this now. I don't think I
> can explain it any better than this. Perhaps someone else can chime in if
> they think they can help.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 at 03:17 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> > You misunderstand. This isn't about replacing one type of assumption
> about
> > your intentions with another type. Instead, it's about holding people
> > accountable for their actions (and the effects of those actions)
> > irrespective of their intentions.
>
> Please explain or elaborate what you mean by "accountable". If
> "accountable" means "Hey, you should not have..." with a "Oh, sorry about
> that, my mistake" reply, then I have no problem. If it means "Hey, X said
> Y, ban..." (which is what I read in the word 'enforcement'), then I do have
> a big problem with that.
>
> > As has been mentioned on this thread already, not many people explicitly
> > set out to send a harmful email. And yet many harmful emails are probably
> > sent to our lists daily.
>
> And likewise, many people are reminded daily that emails are difficult
> medium to communicate in and that words often can be read in more than one
> way.
>
> > You sent me a private email saying, effectively: "Suppose you are right
> > about what you claim to have experienced, I have yet to see the evidence.
> > Please dig up that evidence and show it to me to convince me you're not
> > just a cry-baby."
>
> Do you want me to post it full here? Because, I didn't say "you", I said
> "people"... and you may have chosen to include yourself in that. "People
> commit murders" --> "He just called me a murderer!", do you see the
> parallel? Again, I think this shows the problem of expressing oneself in
> email, since it is impossible to anticipate every possible interpretation,
> both among native speakers and those that are less fluent.
>
> > It certainly doesn't engender any confidence that you would take me
> > seriously and not challenge me point by point, if I were to go to that
> > herculean effort of documenting all the things that contributed to my
> > emotional burnt out over the years.
>
> I didn't ask for "all the things". I asked "what [changes] in ASF could
> have led to an outcome that satisfied you."
> Instead, you hand waved a "This is a thoroughly horrible email for you to
> have sent me. " without further explanation, and now you say that it was
> because you think I called you a "cry-baby" when I didn't; <quote>convince
> me that this is not about a cry-baby and victimhood culture that people are
> trying to breed at ASF</quote>
> I also assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you are a native speaker, and
> that you wouldn't have problem parsing my language. If I thought otherwise,
> I would indeed have constructed simpler sentences.
>
> > When we harm someone (for our purposes, let's assume unintentionally) the
> > person we harmed is usually not in the best place to do the emotional
> > labour necessary to explain why they are upset, or what was done wrong.
> >
> > This is where we find utility in shared community standards, clearly
> > documented in things like a code of conduct.
>
> I agree, and we have a Code of Conduct. I have no issue with people who
> speak out against ad hominems and name calling, and I agree that such
> behavior is unacceptable. What I do have a problem with is words like "feel
> safe". It is subjective and the ASF can not institute any mechanisms to
> make that a reality, other than banning criticism, debate and frankly
> anything that is not a lambda expression (free of side-effects). Being
> criticized on technical merit, conflicting opinions on possible ideas and
> similar non-personal topics, should not in my opinion be curbed. I think
> that is not the intention, but some people may think that is "feeling
> unsafe"...
>
> > These are not tools to bash people around head with. They are learning
> > resources. If there was a page somewhere that said "when someone is
> > reporting having had a bad experience, try to listen, believe, and
> support
> > them" (and so on) I could say "hey, I think what you did is in violation
> of
> > this principal". And then maybe other people with more energy than me,
> who
> > are less emotionally invested in what just happened, can talk to you
> about
> > it.
>
> Yes, this is very good argument and something I fully support. I would also
> appreciate language in Code of Conduct and "goals for diversity" page to
> that effect, i.e. "education", "promotion", "encouragement" and "peer
> support", rather than the very harsh "enforcement" (maybe I am too
> sensitive to that word, after living in China too long).
> I have just posted a proposal to change that "correct" what I take issue
> with.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
This is the last email I am going to send on the specifics of me not liking
the response I got on this thread. I have a follow-up email that will
hopefully get us back on topic.
Here's an excerpt of what you chose to email me privately:
> Now, you have claimed that you have been suffering from prejudice and
discrimination in the past, but I have no recollection of actual examples,
where there really was an unacceptable behavior conducted AND that there
were no repercussions from the ASF. Without examples, you are making
unsubstantiated claims and hypotheticals, and those are really hard to
discuss, due the the vagueness and rhetoric that accompanies those. With a
public record, where you can point at "Look, here.... this... that... and X
said, and Y defended..." then that is something you can use to convince me
that this is not about a cry-baby and victimhood culture that people are
trying to breed at ASF, with the silent support of those who are scared of
speaking up against it, because they don't want to be cast in unfavorable
light.
"you have claimed"
"I have no recollection of actual examples"
"you are making unsubstantiated claims and hypotheticals"
I'm reporting on my feelings. They're not "unsubstantiated claims" because
I don't need to substantiate my emotions. If I tell you I had a bad time,
you ought to just accept it. They're certainly not hypotheticals either. I
wish.
Do you see how this language you've chosen, and indeed the approach you've
taken, contribute to the invalidation of my emotional and psychological
state?
You make it clear that unless I convince you, personally, that I am right
to feel the way I feel, you will categorise the act of sharing my feelings
an attempt to spread a "cry-baby and victimhood culture".
This is not the way we should be responding to people who are saying "I had
a bad time".
Maybe if someone was saying "I had a bad time, so take these specific
punitive measures against these specific people". Then we would want to
collect documentary evidence. We'd want to understand the ins and the outs
of the situation. But that would fall to the appropriate group of people,
who would want to do it sensitively, and in private.
Emailing random people you've seen posting on a mailing list about having a
bad time and challenging them to justify themselves to you is not okay
behaviour. But I am going to stop talking about this now. I don't think I
can explain it any better than this. Perhaps someone else can chime in if
they think they can help.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 at 03:17 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> > You misunderstand. This isn't about replacing one type of assumption
> about
> > your intentions with another type. Instead, it's about holding people
> > accountable for their actions (and the effects of those actions)
> > irrespective of their intentions.
>
> Please explain or elaborate what you mean by "accountable". If
> "accountable" means "Hey, you should not have..." with a "Oh, sorry about
> that, my mistake" reply, then I have no problem. If it means "Hey, X said
> Y, ban..." (which is what I read in the word 'enforcement'), then I do have
> a big problem with that.
>
> > As has been mentioned on this thread already, not many people explicitly
> > set out to send a harmful email. And yet many harmful emails are probably
> > sent to our lists daily.
>
> And likewise, many people are reminded daily that emails are difficult
> medium to communicate in and that words often can be read in more than one
> way.
>
> > You sent me a private email saying, effectively: "Suppose you are right
> > about what you claim to have experienced, I have yet to see the evidence.
> > Please dig up that evidence and show it to me to convince me you're not
> > just a cry-baby."
>
> Do you want me to post it full here? Because, I didn't say "you", I said
> "people"... and you may have chosen to include yourself in that. "People
> commit murders" --> "He just called me a murderer!", do you see the
> parallel? Again, I think this shows the problem of expressing oneself in
> email, since it is impossible to anticipate every possible interpretation,
> both among native speakers and those that are less fluent.
>
> > It certainly doesn't engender any confidence that you would take me
> > seriously and not challenge me point by point, if I were to go to that
> > herculean effort of documenting all the things that contributed to my
> > emotional burnt out over the years.
>
> I didn't ask for "all the things". I asked "what [changes] in ASF could
> have led to an outcome that satisfied you."
> Instead, you hand waved a "This is a thoroughly horrible email for you to
> have sent me. " without further explanation, and now you say that it was
> because you think I called you a "cry-baby" when I didn't; <quote>convince
> me that this is not about a cry-baby and victimhood culture that people are
> trying to breed at ASF</quote>
> I also assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you are a native speaker, and
> that you wouldn't have problem parsing my language. If I thought otherwise,
> I would indeed have constructed simpler sentences.
>
> > When we harm someone (for our purposes, let's assume unintentionally) the
> > person we harmed is usually not in the best place to do the emotional
> > labour necessary to explain why they are upset, or what was done wrong.
> >
> > This is where we find utility in shared community standards, clearly
> > documented in things like a code of conduct.
>
> I agree, and we have a Code of Conduct. I have no issue with people who
> speak out against ad hominems and name calling, and I agree that such
> behavior is unacceptable. What I do have a problem with is words like "feel
> safe". It is subjective and the ASF can not institute any mechanisms to
> make that a reality, other than banning criticism, debate and frankly
> anything that is not a lambda expression (free of side-effects). Being
> criticized on technical merit, conflicting opinions on possible ideas and
> similar non-personal topics, should not in my opinion be curbed. I think
> that is not the intention, but some people may think that is "feeling
> unsafe"...
>
> > These are not tools to bash people around head with. They are learning
> > resources. If there was a page somewhere that said "when someone is
> > reporting having had a bad experience, try to listen, believe, and
> support
> > them" (and so on) I could say "hey, I think what you did is in violation
> of
> > this principal". And then maybe other people with more energy than me,
> who
> > are less emotionally invested in what just happened, can talk to you
> about
> > it.
>
> Yes, this is very good argument and something I fully support. I would also
> appreciate language in Code of Conduct and "goals for diversity" page to
> that effect, i.e. "education", "promotion", "encouragement" and "peer
> support", rather than the very harsh "enforcement" (maybe I am too
> sensitive to that word, after living in China too long).
> I have just posted a proposal to change that "correct" what I take issue
> with.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> You misunderstand. This isn't about replacing one type of assumption about
> your intentions with another type. Instead, it's about holding people
> accountable for their actions (and the effects of those actions)
> irrespective of their intentions.
Please explain or elaborate what you mean by "accountable". If
"accountable" means "Hey, you should not have..." with a "Oh, sorry about
that, my mistake" reply, then I have no problem. If it means "Hey, X said
Y, ban..." (which is what I read in the word 'enforcement'), then I do have
a big problem with that.
> As has been mentioned on this thread already, not many people explicitly
> set out to send a harmful email. And yet many harmful emails are probably
> sent to our lists daily.
And likewise, many people are reminded daily that emails are difficult
medium to communicate in and that words often can be read in more than one
way.
> You sent me a private email saying, effectively: "Suppose you are right
> about what you claim to have experienced, I have yet to see the evidence.
> Please dig up that evidence and show it to me to convince me you're not
> just a cry-baby."
Do you want me to post it full here? Because, I didn't say "you", I said
"people"... and you may have chosen to include yourself in that. "People
commit murders" --> "He just called me a murderer!", do you see the
parallel? Again, I think this shows the problem of expressing oneself in
email, since it is impossible to anticipate every possible interpretation,
both among native speakers and those that are less fluent.
> It certainly doesn't engender any confidence that you would take me
> seriously and not challenge me point by point, if I were to go to that
> herculean effort of documenting all the things that contributed to my
> emotional burnt out over the years.
I didn't ask for "all the things". I asked "what [changes] in ASF could
have led to an outcome that satisfied you."
Instead, you hand waved a "This is a thoroughly horrible email for you to
have sent me. " without further explanation, and now you say that it was
because you think I called you a "cry-baby" when I didn't; <quote>convince
me that this is not about a cry-baby and victimhood culture that people are
trying to breed at ASF</quote>
I also assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you are a native speaker, and
that you wouldn't have problem parsing my language. If I thought otherwise,
I would indeed have constructed simpler sentences.
> When we harm someone (for our purposes, let's assume unintentionally) the
> person we harmed is usually not in the best place to do the emotional
> labour necessary to explain why they are upset, or what was done wrong.
>
> This is where we find utility in shared community standards, clearly
> documented in things like a code of conduct.
I agree, and we have a Code of Conduct. I have no issue with people who
speak out against ad hominems and name calling, and I agree that such
behavior is unacceptable. What I do have a problem with is words like "feel
safe". It is subjective and the ASF can not institute any mechanisms to
make that a reality, other than banning criticism, debate and frankly
anything that is not a lambda expression (free of side-effects). Being
criticized on technical merit, conflicting opinions on possible ideas and
similar non-personal topics, should not in my opinion be curbed. I think
that is not the intention, but some people may think that is "feeling
unsafe"...
> These are not tools to bash people around head with. They are learning
> resources. If there was a page somewhere that said "when someone is
> reporting having had a bad experience, try to listen, believe, and support
> them" (and so on) I could say "hey, I think what you did is in violation
of
> this principal". And then maybe other people with more energy than me, who
> are less emotionally invested in what just happened, can talk to you about
> it.
Yes, this is very good argument and something I fully support. I would also
appreciate language in Code of Conduct and "goals for diversity" page to
that effect, i.e. "education", "promotion", "encouragement" and "peer
support", rather than the very harsh "enforcement" (maybe I am too
sensitive to that word, after living in China too long).
I have just posted a proposal to change that "correct" what I take issue
with.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
You misunderstand. This isn't about replacing one type of assumption about
your intentions with another type. Instead, it's about holding people
accountable for their actions (and the effects of those actions)
irrespective of their intentions.
As has been mentioned on this thread already, not many people explicitly
set out to send a harmful email. And yet many harmful emails are probably
sent to our lists daily.
It's not good enough to say "they mean well" if everyone means well.
Because it doesn't actually move us any closer to having a friendly, safe,
and welcoming community.
You sent me a private email saying, effectively: "Suppose you are right
about what you claim to have experienced, I have yet to see the evidence.
Please dig up that evidence and show it to me to convince me you're not
just a cry-baby."
Maybe you don't understand how upsetting this sort of email is to receive.
It certainly doesn't engender any confidence that you would take me
seriously and not challenge me point by point, if I were to go to that
herculean effort of documenting all the things that contributed to my
emotional burnt out over the years.
Emotional burnt out, by the way, at the hands of people who, for the most
part, I am sure "meant well", but who harmed me and others anyway. (A lot
of this happened on project specific lists, though, as I'm sure some
members on this list are guessing, there were a few
breaking-the-camel's-back type threads last year on the foundation lists.)
When we harm someone (for our purposes, let's assume unintentionally) the
person we harmed is usually not in the best place to do the emotional
labour necessary to explain why they are upset, or what was done wrong.
This is where we find utility in shared community standards, clearly
documented in things like a code of conduct.
These are not tools to bash people around head with. They are learning
resources. If there was a page somewhere that said "when someone is
reporting having had a bad experience, try to listen, believe, and support
them" (and so on) I could say "hey, I think what you did is in violation of
this principal". And then maybe other people with more energy than me, who
are less emotionally invested in what just happened, can talk to you about
it.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 at 01:24 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> Mark and Sam,
> Thanks for providing some concrete material and context.
>
> In both (terrible) cases, what can possibly change within ASF that this
> won't happen in the future? We can't control what individuals will do.
> Given a large enough population, you will always find unacceptable and
> criminal behavior.
> And somehow, I don't think that is what Sharan, Noah and others are
> targeting either, since this very thread is now said to be an example. Is
> it having an opposing view that is the problem? (Seriously, I don't get
> it...)
>
> And FTR, yes, I am obviously incredulous and ignorant enough to not see how
> any mechanism in the ASF setup causes or encourages bad behavior from
> individuals.
>
> Shane asked me to not stand in the way[1] of people who wants to improve
> diversity, but I am concerned about that _enforcement_ of a Code of Conduct
> will be overused. Yes, I realize that is also without usecases, but Noah
> stated that I am (by asking for some examples) an example of not "feeling
> safe" and I imply from that this _enforcement_ could (maybe should) be
> struck down on me over this very thread, rather than educate me of what is
> so "thoroughly horrible". The "assume the best intentions" attitude seems
> to be slowly replaced by a "assume the worst intentions", and I think that
> too is worrisome, especially with an "enforcement", rather than
> "education", "promotion" and "leading by example" language in Sharan's
> proposal.
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
> [1] A really terrible argument, since you (Shane) would not have that
> attitude for a proposal to allow for GPL'd projects in the ASF. "Don't
> stand in the way for people who wants to improve licensing diversity...
> enforce the right to release under multiple licenses...".
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 15/11/2016 17:28, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
> > > this context.
> > >
> > > We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread
> > already. I
> > > was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to
> > provide
> > > proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
> > > cry-baby and victimhood culture".
> > >
> > > Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
> > > community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this
> sort
> > of
> > > thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
> > >
> > > As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any
> > concrete
> > > point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
> > > Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
> >
> > I received a similar off-list e-mail and while the impression I got was
> > of a general tone of incredulity, I'm prepared to give Niclas the
> > benefit of the doubt and assume it was a poorly worded email and he is
> > trying to better understand something he has never experienced.
> >
> > To summarise what happened in my case:
> >
> > - A list member launched an islamophobic attack on another list member
> > that was way, way over the line (no need to look for it in the archives,
> > it was removed within minutes).
> >
> > - I responded saying such behaviour was completely unacceptable and that
> > I was removing that person from the mailing list.
> >
> > - I then received a series of e-mails over about 24 hours (it might have
> > been less - it was a while ago) that threatened me and my family.
> >
> > - Because I am involved in infra, I was able to to remove the original
> > email from the archives and ensure that the person making the threats
> > was not subscribed to any other ASF lists.
> >
> > - I took the threats seriously enough that I considered cancelling my
> > trip to an upcoming ApacheCon.
> >
> > - I contacted the ASF President who advised I contact local law
> > enforcement and who contacted the ASF lawyers for advice.
> >
> > - I reported the threats to local law enforcement and also my employer
> > (for various reasons including that I might need to cancel the trip they
> > had already paid for).
> >
> > - Local law enforcement responded that - due to the cross-border nature
> > of the threats and the unknown identity of the person threatening me -
> > they weren't going to do anything. In short, they'd need to jump through
> > lots of legal hoops to make progress and the threshold for doing so was
> > somewhere around the level of terrorism and the threats to me and my
> > family fell short of that. I wasn't particularly surprised at this.
> >
> > - I did some digging of my own and while I couldn't track down an ID, I
> > had enough of an idea about location that I concluded that the
> > likelihood of the person turning up at ApacheCon was very low so I went
> > ahead with my trip. I did however, take care to ensure I was with a
> > group of people as much as possible.
> >
> > Generally, I felt it was handled well by the ASF. It helped that I could
> > do most things that required concrete action myself because of my
> > involvement with infra.
> >
> > In terms of where there is scope for improvement, I think we need to
> > make list moderators more aware of the CoC and their options when there
> > are posts that go against the CoC. I also think we need to make our
> > communities in general more aware of the CoC and what to do if they have
> > concerns.
> >
> > Whether we need to formally document how to respond when people report
> > CoC issues is TBD. They are rare enough (I'm one of the PoCs and I
> > haven't received a report yet) that I don't have enough data to
> > determine if there is sufficient commonality for any sort of documented
> > process or whether each needs a custom approach. Someone like Ross who
> > has dealt with more of these is probably in a better position to comment.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > >> ...
> > >>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
> > >> list,
> > >>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
> > >>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
> > >>>
> > >>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to
> > the
> > >>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
> > >> wanted
> > >>> it.
> > >>>
> > >>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to
> > even
> > >>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer
> for
> > >> me,
> > >>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
> > >> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
> > >> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found
> the
> > >> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
> > >>
> > >> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g.
> a
> > >> mailing list and topic?
> > >>
> > >> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
> > >> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
> > >>
> > >> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based
> standards
> > >> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies
> without
> > >> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
> > >> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
> > >> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
Mark and Sam,
Thanks for providing some concrete material and context.
In both (terrible) cases, what can possibly change within ASF that this
won't happen in the future? We can't control what individuals will do.
Given a large enough population, you will always find unacceptable and
criminal behavior.
And somehow, I don't think that is what Sharan, Noah and others are
targeting either, since this very thread is now said to be an example. Is
it having an opposing view that is the problem? (Seriously, I don't get
it...)
And FTR, yes, I am obviously incredulous and ignorant enough to not see how
any mechanism in the ASF setup causes or encourages bad behavior from
individuals.
Shane asked me to not stand in the way[1] of people who wants to improve
diversity, but I am concerned about that _enforcement_ of a Code of Conduct
will be overused. Yes, I realize that is also without usecases, but Noah
stated that I am (by asking for some examples) an example of not "feeling
safe" and I imply from that this _enforcement_ could (maybe should) be
struck down on me over this very thread, rather than educate me of what is
so "thoroughly horrible". The "assume the best intentions" attitude seems
to be slowly replaced by a "assume the worst intentions", and I think that
too is worrisome, especially with an "enforcement", rather than
"education", "promotion" and "leading by example" language in Sharan's
proposal.
Cheers
Niclas
[1] A really terrible argument, since you (Shane) would not have that
attitude for a proposal to allow for GPL'd projects in the ASF. "Don't
stand in the way for people who wants to improve licensing diversity...
enforce the right to release under multiple licenses...".
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 15/11/2016 17:28, Noah Slater wrote:
> > What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
> > this context.
> >
> > We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread
> already. I
> > was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to
> provide
> > proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
> > cry-baby and victimhood culture".
> >
> > Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
> > community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this sort
> of
> > thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
> >
> > As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any
> concrete
> > point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
> > Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
>
> I received a similar off-list e-mail and while the impression I got was
> of a general tone of incredulity, I'm prepared to give Niclas the
> benefit of the doubt and assume it was a poorly worded email and he is
> trying to better understand something he has never experienced.
>
> To summarise what happened in my case:
>
> - A list member launched an islamophobic attack on another list member
> that was way, way over the line (no need to look for it in the archives,
> it was removed within minutes).
>
> - I responded saying such behaviour was completely unacceptable and that
> I was removing that person from the mailing list.
>
> - I then received a series of e-mails over about 24 hours (it might have
> been less - it was a while ago) that threatened me and my family.
>
> - Because I am involved in infra, I was able to to remove the original
> email from the archives and ensure that the person making the threats
> was not subscribed to any other ASF lists.
>
> - I took the threats seriously enough that I considered cancelling my
> trip to an upcoming ApacheCon.
>
> - I contacted the ASF President who advised I contact local law
> enforcement and who contacted the ASF lawyers for advice.
>
> - I reported the threats to local law enforcement and also my employer
> (for various reasons including that I might need to cancel the trip they
> had already paid for).
>
> - Local law enforcement responded that - due to the cross-border nature
> of the threats and the unknown identity of the person threatening me -
> they weren't going to do anything. In short, they'd need to jump through
> lots of legal hoops to make progress and the threshold for doing so was
> somewhere around the level of terrorism and the threats to me and my
> family fell short of that. I wasn't particularly surprised at this.
>
> - I did some digging of my own and while I couldn't track down an ID, I
> had enough of an idea about location that I concluded that the
> likelihood of the person turning up at ApacheCon was very low so I went
> ahead with my trip. I did however, take care to ensure I was with a
> group of people as much as possible.
>
> Generally, I felt it was handled well by the ASF. It helped that I could
> do most things that required concrete action myself because of my
> involvement with infra.
>
> In terms of where there is scope for improvement, I think we need to
> make list moderators more aware of the CoC and their options when there
> are posts that go against the CoC. I also think we need to make our
> communities in general more aware of the CoC and what to do if they have
> concerns.
>
> Whether we need to formally document how to respond when people report
> CoC issues is TBD. They are rare enough (I'm one of the PoCs and I
> haven't received a report yet) that I don't have enough data to
> determine if there is sufficient commonality for any sort of documented
> process or whether each needs a custom approach. Someone like Ross who
> has dealt with more of these is probably in a better position to comment.
>
> Mark
>
>
> >
> > On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >> ...
> >>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
> >> list,
> >>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
> >>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
> >>>
> >>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to
> the
> >>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
> >> wanted
> >>> it.
> >>>
> >>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to
> even
> >>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
> >> me,
> >>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
> >> ...
> >>
> >> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
> >> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
> >> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
> >> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
> >>
> >> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
> >> mailing list and topic?
> >>
> >> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
> >> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
> >>
> >> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
> >> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
> >> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
> >> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
> >> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 15/11/2016 17:28, Noah Slater wrote:
> What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
> this context.
>
> We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread already. I
> was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to provide
> proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
> cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>
> Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
> community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this sort of
> thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
>
> As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any concrete
> point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
> Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
I received a similar off-list e-mail and while the impression I got was
of a general tone of incredulity, I'm prepared to give Niclas the
benefit of the doubt and assume it was a poorly worded email and he is
trying to better understand something he has never experienced.
To summarise what happened in my case:
- A list member launched an islamophobic attack on another list member
that was way, way over the line (no need to look for it in the archives,
it was removed within minutes).
- I responded saying such behaviour was completely unacceptable and that
I was removing that person from the mailing list.
- I then received a series of e-mails over about 24 hours (it might have
been less - it was a while ago) that threatened me and my family.
- Because I am involved in infra, I was able to to remove the original
email from the archives and ensure that the person making the threats
was not subscribed to any other ASF lists.
- I took the threats seriously enough that I considered cancelling my
trip to an upcoming ApacheCon.
- I contacted the ASF President who advised I contact local law
enforcement and who contacted the ASF lawyers for advice.
- I reported the threats to local law enforcement and also my employer
(for various reasons including that I might need to cancel the trip they
had already paid for).
- Local law enforcement responded that - due to the cross-border nature
of the threats and the unknown identity of the person threatening me -
they weren't going to do anything. In short, they'd need to jump through
lots of legal hoops to make progress and the threshold for doing so was
somewhere around the level of terrorism and the threats to me and my
family fell short of that. I wasn't particularly surprised at this.
- I did some digging of my own and while I couldn't track down an ID, I
had enough of an idea about location that I concluded that the
likelihood of the person turning up at ApacheCon was very low so I went
ahead with my trip. I did however, take care to ensure I was with a
group of people as much as possible.
Generally, I felt it was handled well by the ASF. It helped that I could
do most things that required concrete action myself because of my
involvement with infra.
In terms of where there is scope for improvement, I think we need to
make list moderators more aware of the CoC and their options when there
are posts that go against the CoC. I also think we need to make our
communities in general more aware of the CoC and what to do if they have
concerns.
Whether we need to formally document how to respond when people report
CoC issues is TBD. They are rare enough (I'm one of the PoCs and I
haven't received a report yet) that I don't have enough data to
determine if there is sufficient commonality for any sort of documented
process or whether each needs a custom approach. Someone like Ross who
has dealt with more of these is probably in a better position to comment.
Mark
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> ...
>>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
>> list,
>>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
>>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>>>
>>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to the
>>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
>> wanted
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to even
>>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
>> me,
>>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
>> ...
>>
>> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
>> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
>> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
>> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>>
>> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
>> mailing list and topic?
>>
>> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
>> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>>
>> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
>> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
>> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
>> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
>> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
this context.
We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread already. I
was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to provide
proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
cry-baby and victimhood culture".
Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this sort of
thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any concrete
point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> ...
> > You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
> list,
> > saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
> > evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
> >
> > As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to the
> > lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
> wanted
> > it.
> >
> > Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to even
> > think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
> me,
> > is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
> ...
>
> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>
> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
> mailing list and topic?
>
> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>
> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
...
> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing list,
> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>
> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to the
> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you wanted
> it.
>
> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to even
> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for me,
> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
...
I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
mailing list and topic?
Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
one accommodate both sets of feelings?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
If someone in an org I cared about told me they had to take a break for
over a year because it was too damaging for their emotional health I would
be extremely alarmed. My first response would be more to the tune of "oh
wow, I'm so sorry, that's so awful."
I certainly would not immediately jump to dismissing them, asking for
"proof", or describing their experience as a "hypothetical".
It's precisely this sort of stuff that pushed me away in the first place.
Perhaps you're not aware of how upsetting it is to have people react like
this. It can inflict a lot of harm, in aggregate, over time.
You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing list,
saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to the
lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you wanted
it.
Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to even
think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for me,
is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 15:11 Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
Noah,
ASF has not gotten to where it is by generalizations and abstractions of
nonexistent issues. Whenever anyone brings up a hypothetical, be it in
Legal or Membership quorums, the response is that we deal with it when
there are actual usecases.
I am asking for examples, some type of record to consume to form myself an
opinion of whether anything new is needed. If such pragmatism hurts your
feelings, well... I might pity you for being too sensitive, but it is not
an argument and you are not convincing me of anything.
Cheers
Niclas
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
> on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
> treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
> health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
>
> Positioning *war* as the canonical example of un-safety is a poor one.
> There are many forms of safety. Feeling like a community is a good place
> for you to inhabit, feeling like it wont harm you (emotionally, mentally,
> or otherwise) is well within the remit of safety that we, as a
> community-focused org, should be concerned about.
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 10:32 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> > >> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the
> > committer
> > >> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the
> > results.
> > >>
> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
> > >> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
> > >>
> > >> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about
> > ways
> > >> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage
> > diversity.
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > > So; What does "feel safe" mean?
> > > In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt
> > that
> > > you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their
location
> > is
> > > known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or
> > indirectly
> > > causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent
> danger
> > > to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy
> > also
> > > includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our
> survival.
> > > "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and
> other
> > > non-sense.
> > > If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine
> > that
> > > anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
> >
> > Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
> > directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
> > of them.
> >
> > I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
> > of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
> > desired outcomes and should remain.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
Noah,
ASF has not gotten to where it is by generalizations and abstractions of
nonexistent issues. Whenever anyone brings up a hypothetical, be it in
Legal or Membership quorums, the response is that we deal with it when
there are actual usecases.
I am asking for examples, some type of record to consume to form myself an
opinion of whether anything new is needed. If such pragmatism hurts your
feelings, well... I might pity you for being too sensitive, but it is not
an argument and you are not convincing me of anything.
Cheers
Niclas
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
> on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
> treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
> health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
>
> Positioning *war* as the canonical example of un-safety is a poor one.
> There are many forms of safety. Feeling like a community is a good place
> for you to inhabit, feeling like it wont harm you (emotionally, mentally,
> or otherwise) is well within the remit of safety that we, as a
> community-focused org, should be concerned about.
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 10:32 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> > >> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the
> > committer
> > >> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the
> > results.
> > >>
> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
> > >> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
> > >>
> > >> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about
> > ways
> > >> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage
> > diversity.
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > > So; What does "feel safe" mean?
> > > In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt
> > that
> > > you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location
> > is
> > > known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or
> > indirectly
> > > causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent
> danger
> > > to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy
> > also
> > > includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our
> survival.
> > > "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and
> other
> > > non-sense.
> > > If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine
> > that
> > > anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
> >
> > Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
> > directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
> > of them.
> >
> > I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
> > of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
> > desired outcomes and should remain.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I took a leave of absence from the ASF for over a year (my previous email
on this thread was one of my first since returning) precisely because the
treatment I got on these mailing lists was so deleterious for my mental
health that I had to take a break, for my safety.
Positioning *war* as the canonical example of un-safety is a poor one.
There are many forms of safety. Feeling like a community is a good place
for you to inhabit, feeling like it wont harm you (emotionally, mentally,
or otherwise) is well within the remit of safety that we, as a
community-focused org, should be concerned about.
On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 at 10:32 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> >> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the
> committer
> >> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the
> results.
> >>
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
> >> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
> >>
> >> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about
> ways
> >> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage
> diversity.
>
> <snip/>
>
> > So; What does "feel safe" mean?
> > In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt
> that
> > you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location
> is
> > known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or
> indirectly
> > causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent danger
> > to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy
> also
> > includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our survival.
> > "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and other
> > non-sense.
> > If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine
> that
> > anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
>
> Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
> directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
> of them.
>
> I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
> of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
> desired outcomes and should remain.
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 14/11/2016 00:52, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
>> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer
>> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the results.
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
>> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
>>
>> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about ways
>> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage diversity.
<snip/>
> So; What does "feel safe" mean?
> In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt that
> you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location is
> known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or indirectly
> causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent danger
> to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy also
> includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our survival.
> "Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and other
> non-sense.
> If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine that
> anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
Wrong. There are examples of people being threatened and/or assaulted
directly as a result of their participation in an ASF community. I'm one
of them.
I whole-heartedly support the work that Sharan is doing this area. I am
of the view that the phrase "feel safe" is an critical element of the
desired outcomes and should remain.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> *General Diversity Approach and Strategy*
> I haven't had much time to update this on the wiki but once the committer
> survey is complete I will be able to perhaps tailor it based on the results.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/
> Diversity+Strategy+Ideas
>
> I'm still interested in getting feedback and ideas from anyone about ways
> to develop the strategy and actions we can take to help encourage diversity.
>
You should probably know by now that I will always have "negative feedback"
(I am from electronics background... ;-) ) and since you are asking for it.
IMVHO, you have well-intended motivations for doing this, but I only see
"social justice movement" rhetoric and lack of fully thinking things
through.
Instead of tearing everything down, I will criticize a single thing until
that is solved, before moving on to the next on the list (or simply stop).
So; What does "feel safe" mean?
In this context, it must be a first world non-problem. Because I doubt that
you think ASF committers will be hit by drone strikes if their location is
known, that an unfortunate email will cause terrorist attacks or indirectly
causing thermo-nuclear war. "Safe" means that there is no imminent danger
to our lives and physical health. Maslow's somewhat revised hierarchy also
includes "financial security" as it quite directly affects our survival.
"Safe" doesn't encompass "not feeling happy", "I was offended" and other
non-sense.
If you against all odds are talking about real safety; I can't imagine that
anyone became more unsafe after joining ASF communities. Right?
Since I am sure you will defend the "not being offended" case, I take
offense that you think this is an issue. THERE! You have an unsolvable
situation, and no one gives anyone the right to decide where the "line of
offense" is, or being "arbitrator of happiness".
Therefore; "Feelings" are highly subjective, and doesn't belong on "code of
conduct" or similar lists of goals.
Also, ASF has a long history of "reactive behavior" rather than
prescriptive speculation. So, typically we first show what the problem is,
before discussing a solution. Bring actual examples and show that these are
"endorsed" by the overall consensus, and argue why it is not acceptable.
That approach will be respected by highly critical people like myself.
If you formulate it as; "should avoid to humiliate other people" or "try to
express yourself in a friendly and inclusive language" as a guide, then I
have no problem with that. Noah's suggestion of a culture of "Yes, and..."
and "forgiveness" are direct, easily agreeable and doesn't need
"enforcement" only "encouragement" and "highlighted" if breached.
But when the undertone is "enforce... others feeling not happy..." and
similar authoritarian language, then you have to wait until we old folks
(with memories of Soviet Union and Mao's China) have died off.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java