It's sad that we have to address this formally (as formal as c4l gets 
anyway), but that's reality, so yes, bess++ indeed, and mjgiarlo++, 
anarchivist++ for the quick assist.

The responses to the list in the past couple of hours alone suggest that 
this is something much of the community would want to get behind. To 
that end, and as a show of (positive) force--not to mention how cool our 
community is--I think it might be neat if we could find a way to make 
whatever winds up being drafted something we can sign; i.e. attach our 
personal names. I don't know how that would work exactly...maybe via the 
wiki (where it seems to me a lot of good info goes to die) or the 
code4lib Github (slightly better since you could link to your 
credentials in a an environment much larger than our own, and everyone 
could have a copy), but something along those lines. I'm happy to help 
if I can.

Anyway, just a thought.
-Jon

-- 
Jon Stroop
Digital Initiatives Programmer/Analyst
Princeton University Library

[log in to unmask]

http://pudl.princeton.edu
http://findingaids.princeton.edu


On 11/26/12 6:33 PM, Michael J. Giarlo wrote:
> All,
>
> Building on what Bess and others have written, and on the GitHub repo that
> anarchivist set up, I've contributed a rough draft of a Code4Lib code of
> conduct:
>
> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/master/code_of_conduct.md
>
> This strawperson code of conduct is based on DLF Forum's, which is based on
> the Ada Initiative's sample policy. It is modified slightly to reflect a
> broader scope of the conference, conference social events, the IRC channel,
> and the mailing list.
>
> Throw darts, rinse, repeat.
>
> -Mike
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> +1, of course :)
>>
>> You might wish to consider some further derivatives/related pages:
>>      http://www.diglib.org/about/code-of-conduct/
>>      http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy
>>      https://thestrangeloop.com/about/policies
>>      http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/anti-harassment.html
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Mariner, Matthew <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for all of the below
>>>
>>> Matthew C. Mariner
>>> Head of Special Collections and Digital Initiatives
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> Auraria Library
>>> 1100 Lawrence StreetDenver, CO 80204-2041
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> http://library.auraria.edu :: http://archives.auraria.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/26/12 3:51 PM, "Tom Cramer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 for Bess's motion
>>>> +1 for Roy's expansion to C4L online interactions as well as face to
>> face
>>>> +1 for Karen's focus on general inclusivity and fair play
>>>>
>>>>> For me the hardest thing is how one monitors and resolves issues that
>>>>> arise. As a group with no formal management, I suppose the conference
>>>>> organizers become the "deciders" if such a necessity arises. If it's
>>>>> elsewhere (email, IRC) -- that's a bit trickier. The Ada project's
>>>>> detailed guides should help, but if there is a policy it seems that
>>>>> there necessarily has to be some responsible "body" -- even if ad hoc.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that there would be tremendous benefit in having
>>>>
>>>> 1.) an explicit statement of the community norms around harassment and
>>>> fair play in general. In the best case, this would help avoid
>>>> uncomfortable or inappropriate situations before they occur.
>>>>
>>>> 2.) a defined process for handling any incidents that do arise, which in
>>>> the case of this community I would imagine would revolve around
>>>> reporting, communication, negotiation and arbitration rather than
>>>> adjudication by a standing body (which I agree is hard to see in this
>>>> crowd). I know several high schools have adopted peer arbitration
>>>> networks for conflict resolution rather than referring incidents to the
>>>> Principal's Office--perhaps therein lies a model for us for any
>> incidents
>>>> that may not be resolved simply through dialogue.
>>>>
>>>> - Tom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bess and Code4libbers,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've only been to one c4l conference and it was a very positive
>>>>> experience for me, but I also feel that this is too valuable of a
>>>>> community for us to risk it getting itself into crisis mode over some
>>>>> unintended consequences or a "bad apple" incident. For that reason I
>>>>> would support the adoption of an anti-harassment policy in part for its
>>>>> consciousness-raising value. Ideally this would be not only about
>> sexual
>>>>> harassment but would include general goals for inclusiveness and fair
>>>>> play within the community. And it would also serve as an acknowledgment
>>>>> that none of us is perfect, but we can deal with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> For me the hardest thing is how one monitors and resolves issues that
>>>>> arise. As a group with no formal management, I suppose the conference
>>>>> organizers become the "deciders" if such a necessity arises. If it's
>>>>> elsewhere (email, IRC) -- that's a bit trickier. The Ada project's
>>>>> detailed guides should help, but if there is a policy it seems that
>>>>> there necessarily has to be some responsible "body" -- even if ad hoc.
>>>>>
>>>>> kc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/26/12 2:16 PM, Bess Sadler wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Fellow Code4libbers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope I am not about to get flamed. Please take as context that I
>>>>>> have been a member of this community for almost a decade. I have
>>>>>> contributed software, support, and volunteer labor to this community's
>>>>>> events. I have also attended the majority of code4lib conferences,
>>>>>> which have been amazing and life-changing, and have helped me do my
>> job
>>>>>> a lot better. But, and I've never really known how to talk about this,
>>>>>> those conferences have also been problematic for me a couple of times.
>>>>>> Nothing like what happened to Noirin Shirley at ApacheCon (see
>>>>>> http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Noirin_Shirley_ApacheCon_incidentif
>>>>>> you're unfamiliar with the incident I mean) but enough to concern me
>>>>>> that even in a wonderful community where we mostly share the same
>>>>>> values, not everyone has the same definitions of acceptable behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am watching the toxic fallout from the BritRuby conference
>>>>>> cancellation with a heavy heart (go search for "britruby conference
>>>>>> cancelled" if you want to catch up and/or get depressed). It has me
>>>>>> wondering what more we could be doing to promote diversity and
>>>>>> inclusiveness within code4lib. We have already had a couple of
>>>>>> harassment incidents over the years, which I won't rehash here, which
>>>>>> have driven away members of our community. We have also had other
>>>>>> incidents that don't get talked about because sometimes one can feel
>>>>>> that membership in a community is more important than one's personal
>>>>>> boundaries or even safety. We should not be a community where people
>>>>>> have to make that choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like for us to consider adopting an anti-harassment policy
>> for
>>>>>> code4lib conferences. This is emerging as a best practice in the
>> larger
>>>>>> open source software community, and we would be joining the ranks of
>>>>>> many other conferences:
>>>>>>
>> http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption.
>>>>>> The Ada Initiative has a great discussion of why adopting an
>>>>>> Anti-Harrassment policy is a good choice for a conference to make, as
>>>>>> well as some example policy statements, here:
>>>>>> http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/conference-policies/ Here is a
>>>>>> summary:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why have an official anti-harassment policy for your conference?
>>>>>>> First, it is necessary (unfortunately). Harassment at conferences is
>>>>>>> incredibly common - for example, see this timeline
>>>>>>> (http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/index.php?title=Timeline_of_incidents
>> )
>>>>>>> of sexist incidents in geek communities. Second, it sets expectations
>>>>>>> for behavior at the conference. Simply having an anti-harassment
>>>>>>> policy can prevent harassment all by itself. Third, it encourages
>>>>>>> people to attend who have had bad experiences at other conferences.
>>>>>>> Finally, it gives conference staff instructions on how to handle
>>>>>>> harassment quickly, with the minimum amount of disruption or bad
>> press
>>>>>>> for your conference.
>>>>>> If the conference already has something like this in place, and I'm
>>>>>> just uninformed, please educate me and let's do a better job
>>>>>> publicizing it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for considering this suggestion. If the answer is the usual
>>>>>> code4lib answer (some variation on "Great idea! How are you going to
>>>>>> make that happen?") then I hereby nominate myself as a member of the
>>>>>> Anti-Harrassment Policy Adoption committee for the code4lib
>> conference.
>>>>>> Would anyone else like to join me?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bess Sadler
>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Manager, Application Development
>>>>>> Digital Library Systems & Services
>>>>>> Stanford University Library
>>>>> --
>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> skype: kcoylenet