I think that this is fairly close to something that would make sense, but there is sort of a weirdness in the CoC referring to itself in the 3rd person. It sound more like an argument for *having* a CoC than the document itself. I'm not the greatest word-smith, but I'll attempt to rework Josh's draft to something that seems more "natural" to me. At the same time, I'll try to incorporate other comments, like Tom's comment about enforcement mechanisms and the gray areas in members of the community communicating in public forums. On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > PostgreSQL Global Development Group (PGDG) Code of Conduct (CoC): > > 1. The CoC is to provide community guidelines for creating and enforcing a > safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person who is > willing to contribute in a safe, respectful, productive and collaborative > way. > > 2. A safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment is free of > personal attacks and disparaging remarks of any kind. > > 3. The CoC is not about being offended. One should always assume good > intentions. As with any diverse community, anyone can get offended at > anything. > > 4. Any sustained disruption of the collaborative space (mailing lists, IRC > etc..) or other PostgreSQL events shall be construed as a violation of the > CoC and appropriate action will be taken by the CoC committee. > > 5. The CoC is only about interaction with the PostgreSQL community. Your > private and public lives outside of the PostgreSQL community are your own. == PostgreSQL Community Code of Conduct (CoC) == This document is intended to provide community guidelines for creating and enforcing a safe, respectful, productive, and collaborative place for any person who is willing to contribute in a safe, respectful, productive and collaborative way. * To maintain a safe, respectful, productive and collaborative environment all participants must ensure that their language and actions are free of personal attacks and disparaging remarks of any kind. * When interpreting the words and actions of others, participants should always assume good intentions. Consider that due to language and cultural differences, something may be intended in a benign or helpful way, even if some participants initially see a possible interpretation which is otherwise. * All participants must avoid sustained disruption of the collaborative space (mailing lists, IRC etc..) or other PostgreSQL events. * There is a distinction between words and actions taken inside the community and words and actions outside community communication channels and events, but there is a gray area when using public forums or social media where a person identifies as a member of this community. Members of the community, especially those with a high profile within the community, should be mindful of this and avoid anything which might create an unwelcoming or hostile attitude toward the community in such venues. * Participants who feel that they have not been treated in accordance with this Code of Conduct may want to try to sort things out in the forum where there was a perception of a problem; asking for a clarification or an apology either in a public discussion context or privately can often resolve an issue quickly to everyone's satisfaction. Where this fails, the Core Team is responsible for determining what, if any, action is appropriate. The core team is listed, with a link to the purpose of team, at the top of the community's "Contributor Profiles" page: http://www.postgresql.org/community/contributors/ To me, this reads more like the document itself. I hope I have done justice to Josh's points as well as Tom's, although I would bet there are a number of people on the list that can improve on my effort here. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
