| Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Code of conduct |
The Eclipse Foundation has a Community Code of Conduct [1] that one would assum also covers Jakarta. But given recent discussions, I (speaking just as a community member) would propose that it would be greatly beneficial to the Jakarta community and brand if Jakarta itself were to specifically adopt an official code of conduct (the Eclipse one or a more specific one) which governs the experts as well as the community. I would suggest that the following areas be covered by such a code: * Behavior (being respectful, accepting responsibility, honesty, empathy, safety) * Content (clarifying objective vs subjective language, being concise and rigorous, avoiding hyperbole and "argument strategies") * Remedy (what to do in case of violations, how to correct problems, how to deal with mistakes) The behavior area I consider to be what a traditional "project" code of conduct (such as Contributor Covenant, the existing Eclipse Code of Conduct or similar) would normally cover. This would cover unacceptable behavior such as abuse, harassment, trolling, personal attacks, etc. Jakarta strives to generate specifications. This is more involved, difficult, and complex than many "normal" open source projects that one might find on Eclipse or elsewhere. Because of the special needs of specifications - particularly, the role of clear, concise, and rigorously correct language in a coherent specification - I would propose that clear content and communication is also an area of conduct that should be covered. Just as we must all work a bit harder to respect one another, we must also work a bit harder to be precise in our language, in order to provide the best specifications possible. Imprecise language goes over the line into misconduct when opinions are asserted as though they were facts, hyperbolic or bombastic statements are made to maximize emotional impact, or broad generalizations or other logically fallacious statements are used deliberately to derail constructive discussion. When developing a specification - which is by nature required to be as objective as possible - these kinds of machinations can disrupt or undermine what may already be a very difficult endeavor. Finally, a remedial path is necessary because, as humans, all of us have (and will) make mistakes. The code should outline a path not only for the spec committee and other official structures to cope with problems, but also for those community members who have in fact found themselves in violation of the code, so that they understand how to make amends and avoid lingering resentment, which can have a detrimental long term effect on the community. Many such strategies can be found in typical autism behavior programs, but are (in my opinion) actually quite useful for any person who finds themselves on the wrong side of a behavioral problem and are unsure what to do. In particular, there seems to be credible evidence that "zero tolerance" policies neither deter nor repair undesirable behavior. Having a comprehensive code of conduct which is consistently applied is, in my opinion, a necessary feature of a serious specification body in this decade. I believe that the lack of a CoC covering these areas is a deterrent to participation. I know that it is a deterrent to me, at any rate. [1] https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Community_Code_of_Conduct.php
Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
@mmilinkov
+1.613.220.3223 (m)