[Pharo-users] Code of Conduct

Richard O'Keefe raoknz at gmail.com
Thu Sep 12 10:13:32 EDT 2019


There are some aspects of the "Covenant" that rub me up the wrong way.
I note that the only part of it where anyone actually promises to do
(or not do) anything is the "Pledge", which rather pointedly refrains
from treating people with different political viewpoints (like gun
ownership, or like TERFs who are silent about their opinions within
the group) well.  It's about supporting diversity of *being*, not
diversity of *opinion*.

There are other codes of conduct around which are framed in less
identitarian terms.  And it is rather startling to find that one
is expected to be bound by a "Covenant" which is no Covenant (that
is, an *agreement*).  A code of conduct can be imposed from the
top down; a covenant requires the consent of the governed.

I am somewhat perturbed by the term "inclusive language" because
it is a shifting standard.  I have frequently heard young women
addressing each other as "guys", yet have just recently watching
someone basically saying "I know it's gender neutral now and there
is no malice in it but it's exclusionary so it's really bad."
So if you say something like "hey guys" in a message, you have just
violated this covenant, and deserve to be thrown out.  Or then
again, you may not have.  Who decides?  In a world where an
anti-racist black hero gets labelled a white supremacist, who decides?

Here's another case.  Many mailing lists or newsgroups have a policy
"no homework answers".  If you tell someone off for violating that
policy, your mailing list or newsgroup is not welcoming and inclusive.
In another mailing list I am on, there is a clear and explicit "no HTML
postings" policy, for good topic-specific reason, and people are often
(politely) told off for violating it.  As I read the Covenant, that's
not allowed.

In a mailing list where you have no idea of my age, sex, body size,
gender orientation, etc, much of the Covenant is prima facie pointless.

The Covenant goes way too far to be a mere "be nice to each other" guide.

I have no intention of giving offence, and I am I not going to pull out
of the mailing list, but couldn't some less creepy code be adopted?





On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 08:08, Sean P. DeNigris <sean at clipperadams.com>
wrote:

> Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
> > https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct - which
> > is quite popular and generally accepted.
>
> Based on the reaction earlier in the thread, I was expecting something
> highly opinionated and polarizing, but it seems to boil down to: be
> professional and don't make it personal. While there are some categories of
> people mentioned, it doesn't seem to make a value judgement about them, but
> merely say that no one (including from those categories) will be harassed
> inside the Pharo community. Seems pretty reasonable, unless I'm missing
> something...
>
>
>
> -----
> Cheers,
> Sean
> --
> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20190913/7dcdb318/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Pharo-users mailing list