Adopt Code of Conduct for CoTech
We don't have Code of Conduct (CoC) for CoTech. There's been talk of having one for years for years:
https://wiki.coops.tech/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
https://community.coops.tech/t/cotech-code-of-conduct/2459
Here is my proposal for a CoTech CoC to de adopted for physical spaces and online spaces. I'm going to open a decision for this asap. Let me know if you have any feedback. It's pretty standard stuff.
Poll Created Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
Adopt CoTech Code of Conduct and create Welfare Circle Closed Thu 30 Jun 2022 6:01PM
I would also like to create a Welfare and conflict circle with 2-3 other people that would have an email address (e.g. [email protected]) that would serve as a contact point for any welfare or conflict issues. During in person events such as gathering, a temporary Welfare facilitator should be appointed and identified to attendees.
CoTech Code of Conduct
Our Pledge
We as members, contributors, and facilitators pledge to make participation in our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
We pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community.
Our Standards
Examples of behaviour that contributes to a positive environment for our community include:
Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people
Being respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences
Giving and gracefully accepting constructive feedback
Accepting responsibility and apologizing to those affected by our mistakes, and learning from the experience
Focusing on what is best not just for us as individuals, but for the overall community
Examples of unacceptable behaviour include:
The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind
Trolling, insulting or derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
Public or private harassment
Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or email address, without their explicit permission
Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
Enforcement Responsibilities
Welfare facilitators are responsible for clarifying and enforcing our standards of acceptable behaviour and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any behaviour that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.
Welfare facilitators have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, and will communicate reasons for moderation decisions when appropriate.
Scope
This Code of Conduct applies within all community spaces, and also applies when an individual is officially representing the community in public spaces. Examples of representing our community include using an official e-mail address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed representative at an online or offline event.
Enforcement
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behaviour may be reported to the welfare facilitators responsible for enforcement via email at [email protected]. All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.
All welfare facilitators are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident.
Enforcement Guidelines
Community facilitators will follow these Community Impact Guidelines in determining the consequences for any action they deem in violation of this Code of Conduct:
1. Correction
Community Impact: Use of inappropriate language or other behaviour deemed unprofessional or unwelcome in the community.
Consequence: A private, written warning from welfare facilitators, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behaviour was inappropriate. A public apology may be requested.
2. Warning
Community Impact: A violation through a single incident or series of actions.
Consequence: A warning with consequences for continued behaviour. No interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, for a specified period of time. This includes avoiding interactions in community spaces as well as external channels like social media. Violating these terms may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.
3. Temporary Ban
Community Impact: A serious violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behaviour.
Consequence: A temporary ban from any sort of interaction or public communication with the community for a specified period of time. No public or private interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, is allowed during this period. Violating these terms may lead to a permanent ban.
4. Permanent Ban
Community Impact: Demonstrating a pattern of violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behaviour, harassment of an individual, or aggression toward or disparagement of classes of individuals.
Consequence: A permanent ban from any sort of public interaction within the community.
Attribution
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the Contributor Covenant, version 2.0, available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/0/code_of_conduct.html.
Community Impact Guidelines were inspired by Mozilla’s code of conduct enforcement ladder.
For answers to common questions about this code of conduct, see the FAQ at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq. Translations are available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/translations.
Results
Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Agree | 62.5% | 5 | |
Abstain | 25.0% | 2 | ||
Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Block | 12.5% | 1 | ||
Undecided | 0% | 134 |
8 of 142 people have participated (5%)
Chris Croome (Webarchitects Co-operative)
Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
Webarchitects has a committee meeting on Wednesday at which I anticipate we will agree to this proposal and after that I'll update this vote.
Liam MacLeod (MediaBlaze Hosts)
Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
MediaBlaze Hosts have also not had sufficient time to discuss this and I (Liam) would have preferred a session in which members that were not able to attend in person be able to discuss and create the proposal be involved in a timely manner.
Chris Lowis (Go Free Range)
Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
We (Go Free Range) agree to this proposal, thanks for making it happen. My question about who will volunteer to be on the circle and for how long still stands, but I don't think that should block adopting the CoC (but the absence of someone checking the welfare@ email might make it less useful/effective in practice)
Shaun Fensom
Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
I still feel like this is rushed. At CBN we've not been able to discuss.
Animorph Co-op
Thu 16 Jun 2022 1:16PM
An established Code of Conduct already in use seems a safe place to start, though going forward could be more fleshed out around the welfare officer roles e.g. maybe they could report anonymously to general circle meetings whether there are any issues being resolved - no detail if confidential, just number/status, to for accountability/transparency/support. To be iterated upon!
Autonomic Co-operative Sun 19 Jun 2022 6:08PM
Apologies folks, short decision time was human error on my part. Proposal reopened and extended to the end of the month as originally intended - Leo
Chris Lowis (Go Free Range) Mon 20 Jun 2022 9:50AM
This seems like a good idea to me, we've been talking about doing this for ages - thanks for taking the initiative and basing it on an existing CoC that has been tested at other orgs.
The proposal mentions a "Welfare and conflict circle with 2-3 other people". Do you know yet who those people would be, and what would happen if (volunteers?) were not forthcoming? Do you imagine setting a term limit on the members of that circle?
I can't see a reason why we wouldn't support - but a bit of extra time for everyone to consider would be ace. Thanks again!
Shaun Fensom · Sat 18 Jun 2022 5:36PM
I agree. Not enough time.