That seems like a great idea to me, Deborah. 
From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Fitchett, Deborah [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 10:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Answer to your question Re: [CODE4LIB] Group Decision Making (was Zoia)

Thank you Becky, Karen and Gary for your answers (and excuse the delay replying; have been attempting to clear my head despite the heat and an achy ankle combining against me).

The "backup" buttons are a good idea, and I definitely support both Becky and Karen's suggestions for additions to the policy. I think it's helpful breaking it down into separate parts. It's especially helpful to have expectations for the community, since the more the community can be trusted, the more safe people will feel to mention when something's an issue.

Would it be useful to have something (whether as part of the CoC or just some discussion) for the 'offender' as well? Not so much for the person who intends to offend, because they're going to do that wherever they think they can; but for the person who didn't intend to offend (and/or doesn't think they did) or the person who wants to avoid offending (while still actually enjoying the party)? I recall some stuff on that angle from a recent discussion of sf conventions, and should be able to dig up links if it's of interest to anyone here.


-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Becky Yoose
Sent: Wednesday, 30 January 2013 1:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CODE4LIB] Answer to your question Re: [CODE4LIB] Group Decision Making (was Zoia)

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Fitchett, Deborah <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> So, given that we're all nice people who wouldn't intentionally harass or make spurious claims of harassment against each other, nevertheless sometimes someone will unintentionally say or do something that (especially given the concept of microagressions that Karen and I have alluded to and Kathryn named) really hurts someone else.  This is, whatever else you want to call it, a problem because it decreases the feeling of community.
> So, how as a community should we respond when this happens?
> That's my question.

Different people will have different answers, but here's mine to answer your question:

I'm breaking this into two parts: the Incident and the Community Response

1. Incident happens. Inform the offender that he/she has affected you negatively. Oftentimes, as you pointed out, stuff like this is unintentional, and the accidental offender and offended will resolve the incident by having that initial discussion. I would predict that most incidents will be resolved here.

2. If offender insists that he/she did not offend, or if offender is actively harassing you, then you will need a third party to step in.
These people have either been indicated by the CoC or by the listserv as those who you should go to for help.

If you are at a conference, find the conference organizer or staff person. For #c4l13, that would be Francis. If you can't find Francis, there will be other conference staff that would be available to help if the situation calls for immediate action.

If you are in the #code4lib IRC, the zoia command to list people designated as channel helpers is @helpers. I'd assume that there is at least one helper in the channel at most times.

For the listserv, you have a free-for-all for public messages; however, this listserv does have a maintainer, Eric Lease Morgan.

3. Wider community response to Incident:

If the incident doesn't past the first step (discussion reveals offense was unintentional, apologies said, public note or community is informed of resolution), then there's not much the community can do at this point since the incident was resolved without outside intervention.

If incident results in corrective action, the community should support the decision made by the Help in Step 2 if they choose corrective action, like ending a talk early or banning from the listserv, as well as support those harmed by the incident, either publicly or privately (whatever individuals are comfortable with).

If the Help in Step 2 run into issues implementing the CoC, then the Help should come to the community with these issues and the community should revise the CoC as they see fit.

So that's my answer. In Real Life people will have opinions about how the CoC is enforced. People will argue that a particular decision was unfair, and others will say that it didn't go far enough. We really can't stop people having opinions, but what we could do here is have constructive discussions that lead to something tangible (affirmation of decision, change in CoC, modify decision, etc,), instead of reproducing the comments section of a story on a news site.

I can add this as a new issue to the CoC Github, as supporting documentation to the code later today.


P Please consider the environment before you print this email.
"The contents of this e-mail (including any attachments) may be confidential and/or subject to copyright. Any unauthorised use,
distribution, or copying of the contents is expressly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise the sender
by return e-mail or telephone and then delete this e-mail together with all attachments from your system."