SQLite has gone friggin Old Testament with its Code of Conduct [1]

I submitted the link to tilde.news [3] with the following comment:

>This kind of kicks off a discussion about what goes in a Code of Conduct.
>
>Who is the Code of Conduct for? For projects like this maintained by an
>individual, is it just a testament to the vanity of the maintainer? Is he
>trying to attract a certain kind of contributor or build a certain kind of
>community? Is he trying to discourage certain kinds of contributors?
>
>This feels needlessly political and polarizing, and that it creates more of a
>divide than a welcoming or inclusive feeling. I, for one, don't feel
>encouraged to contribute or frankly even use the product any more.
>
>It's also in stark contrast to the work we just did over at tilde.town on
>making our Code of Conduct and Etiquette Guide more up to date and fair.

I think it's super interesting.

There was a whole long discussion about it in #tildetown and I've gone back
and forth on it a couple times.

Here's where I'm at right now at this current point in time.


---------------------
1. Admission of fault
---------------------

When I first saw this, I read _First of all, love the Lord God with your
whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole strength_ and nope-d out of
there. I will from this perspective say that this was a knee jerk reaction
based on my own prejudices and that if I had acted with a little more
maturity, I might have given it a more fair reading.

I didn't react with all the empathy I could have.


--------------------------------------
2. A Code of Conduct of No Consequence
--------------------------------------

There are some interesting things going on here, laid out in Section 1.
Overview. Primarily the bits that say that the CoC cannot be complied with:

  * >This rule is strict, and none are able to comply perfectly

and that there are no consequences for not following it.

  * >Grace is readily granted for minor transgressions.

  * >we make no enforcement of the more introspective aspects

It instead exists as a guideline, a way to create "spirit of rule" to
which one should adhere:

  * >those who wish to participate...are expected to conduct themselves in
    >a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule, even if they
    >disagree with specific details

This, for me, really brings into focus the question of what a Code of
Conduct *is*, what it is supposed to be, if it is binding at all. Whether
it needs to be adhered to and whether there are consequences for not
following it. Whether it can be dictated by the single author/maintainer of
a project [2] and then be expected to be respected by the community using
that project. Or whether community involement and *consent of the governed*
is necessary for it to be taken seriously and to be respected and followed.

Because at its core, a community's Code of Conduct is a very local and
small scale of self-governance.


------------------------
3. Motivation and Intent
------------------------

First of all, there's the _content_, and there's the _presentation_ of said content.

The CoC is introduced thusly:

>Having been encouraged by clients to adopt a written code of conduct...

Not, for example, like any of the following:

* As an inclusive community...

* To boost harmony and productivity and create a safe, welcoming
 environment...

* These are the qualities and the ways of working that we value...

Instead the tone, right from the very beginning, is defensive. As though
adopting a code of conduct is something they did simply to be in compliance
with the (unreasonable) expectations of their clients and of the wider online
community.

It conveys no ownership, investment, or authenticity.

What it *does* convey is a sort of passive-aggressive malicious compliance,
creating a context in which the sincerity of the document is questioned.
Making it look like they're posting, as ~selfsame said, a "gag 1300 rulebook".


--------------------------
4. But back to the content
--------------------------

The actual content of Code of Conduct is the entire fourth chapter of St.
Benedict's Rule for Monasteries, titled _What Are the Instruments of Good
Works_, [4] which is a superb name for a Code of Conduct.

It consists of 72 short rules on how the monks are to conduct themselves. Some
of them are great ways to govern an online community:

* Do not give way to anger

* Be a help in times of trouble

* Be not lazy

* Be not a grumbler

* Be not a detractor

Others cannot be easily separated from their original context and applied to a
software development context in any meaningful way:

* First of all, love the Lord God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and
 your whole strength

* Deny oneself in order to follow Christ

* Prefer nothing more than the love of Christ

* Pray for your enemies in the love of Christ

And on.

And what I'll return to here are the basic questions of intent behind the CoC:

What are you trying to achieve? What unity and community are you hoping to
create? What kind of people/behaviors are you trying to *avoid* and keep
outside of your community.

Because when it comes to creating a welcoming environment, for me, this ain't
it.

I think the underlying issue here is that this is a code of conduct that has
been crafted to appeal to a very narrow population and to be distasteful to
the rest, which is a perversion of what a code of conduct ought to be: a way
for a diverse group to collaborate, communicate, and work together in a way
that makes everybody feel welcome and safe, despite their beliefs.


--------------
5. Now Flip It
--------------

Now what if the CoC had been politicized in a way that I agreed with? What if
it had been based on a humanist/atheist creed? Or had included some kind of a
vegan manifesto?

vim, which I use all day every day, asks for donations to help children in
Uganda whenever I open it [5]. Is this different? I think it is. It's the
solicitation of a piece of self-described charityware.

What it is not is the description for how a community should behave and
self-govern.

So again, what if CoC had been presented in a way that heavily favored my own
political/religious views? Would I be stoked about that, or concerned about
ostracizing and demoralizing those with opposing views?

I'd probably be into it. And I'd argue that the community is self-selecting.
If there are those who disagree strongly, then they are invited to not
participate.

Which is perhaps another way around to the same issue: I feel invited to not
participate.


------------------------------------------
6. Comparrison With Other Codes of Conduct
------------------------------------------

Codes of Conduct which I like:

* <http://tilde.town/wiki/conduct.html> and
 <http://tilde.town/wiki/etiquette.html>

* <https://www.thestrangeloop.com/policies.html>

Codes of Conduct that are kinda bullshit:

* <https://sysdef.de/botwar_channelrules.txt>

---

Tags: #community

References:

[1]: https://sqlite.org/codeofconduct.html
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._Richard_Hipp
[3]: https://tilde.news/s/pqofxr/sqlite_s_old_testament_code_conduct
[4]: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/50040/50040-h/50040-h.html#chapter-4-nl-what-are-the-instruments-of-good-works
[5]: http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/uganda.html

You are viewing proxied material from tilde.town. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.