[nanomsg] Re: Adopting a CoC

  • From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 00:57:58 +0100


That said, Martin has the trademark for nanomsg still. If he strenuously
objects I’ll shelve the proposal. If anyone else has strenuous objections
to this, please let me know privately, with specific rational reasons for
your concerns.

I think the issue has nothing to do with trademark, so feel free to do as you see fit.

If you ask about my opinion though, I grew up in Ostblok where the "Moral Code of the Builder of Communism" was generally ridiculed and there wasn't a single person that took it seriously.

The problem, I think, was that it was not a descriptive summary of how decent people behaved in the society, but rather a prescriptive code pushed from above for ideological reasons.

The current attempts to adopt CoC in various FOSS projects are IMO doomed for similar reasons. It has zero effect on abusers (no abuser thinks of himself as an abuser) and the message it sends to decent folks is: "There's an elite in the community that will decide what's good and what's bad and enforce it by censoring your emails/posts/contributions." Which in turn erodes trust within the community and, consequently, its ability to spontaneously deal with abuse.

What could work better, I believe, is publishing "abuse postmortems" documenting problems the community have encountered, how it responded, what went well and what went wrong and so on. Such postmortems would a) be much more entertaining to read than CoC b) would not treat community members as idiots who have to be policed to behave decently c) would create a historical record that the community can identify with and refer to in case of need.

That being said, nanomsg community haven't dealt with any abuse problems so far, so the point is mute.


Other related posts: