[IAEP] Improving our Code of Conduct (was: Re: Code of Conduct Motion to add Anti-harassment policy - Sugar Labs)

[Caryl Bigenho]

Sebastian,


In my culture and, possibly in James's culture, accusations such as this one you are making against James, and the one Laura made against me a few weeks ago, are considered "harassment"... actually, extreme harassment. You are denying us the freedom to express our opinions or feelings in a rational way without fearing reprisals and intimidation as what the two of you have chosen to do.


We are all adults here (at least will be after Samson turns 18 on Halloween 😊 ). It's time we start acting like adults and stop "running to Mommie!"


GrannieB


________________________________
From: IAEP <iaep-bounces at lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Sebastian Silva <sebastian at fuentelibre.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 7:41 PM
To: James Cameron; Laura Vargas
Cc: iaep; SLOBs
Subject: [IAEP] Improving our Code of Conduct (was: Re: Code of Conduct Motion to add Anti-harassment policy - Sugar Labs)


Hi,

I had asked that we discuss changes to our Code of Conduct in a wiki page<https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Conduct> I have worked on, where I put the result of a lot of research.

The time I spent, back in January, on this document, is because I myself felt not only harassed but threatened. It came as a realization then, that perhaps more people have had similar experiences and have abandoned Sugar Labs because they were less tenacious than others. Hopefully you'll find the references I put there (beyond geek feminism) interesting. They represent a broad spectrum of approaches to making a community more welcoming.

I found our current Code of Conduct<https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Legal/Code_of_Conduct> was not sufficient because (1) it is vague and difficult to evaluate when it's been infringed. Cultures vary widely with regard to what is considerate, respectful, collaborative, and flexible. It would be much better if specific acceptable or not acceptable behaviors were listed. (2) There is no defined procedure on how to report a problem and what the expected outcome, timeline, or response could be. (3) There's no defined solution or action such as warning or temporarily moderating a person to signal bad behavior.

James, you insist on victimizing yourself and have a confrontational form of writing. Perhaps I'm misreading you. Please improve your tone. I have only seen vague complaints on the alleged dispute ("rate of posting and Wiki editing", and "use of many paths to achieve your goals").

If all of this is because I had the audacity to merge an icon, I feel your attitude is disproportionate, unfair and itself sufficient for a complaint. Trying to flag my github profile seems particularly aggressive and harmful, considering the market use of such profiles.

The trademarked icon has already been reinstated in master branch, but my valid concern (that neither Sugar Labs nor downstream distributors have permission to use it), has not been resolved. I raised the same question openly in 2016, and you responded with sarcasm<http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2016-04-01T19:01:31#i_2864254>. I don't think this is acceptable.

At the moment I don't support Laura's motion because I think it's necessary to write something more specific for Sugar Labs, taking into consideration the other references listed in the page at the least.

Regards,

Sebastian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20171005/adba1f81/attachment-0001.html>