When these guidelines have been created in any location where they are used (e.g. in a CODE-OF-CONDUCT.md in a code repository) it is sufficient to refer to them in a similar way Mozilla does:
I have updated the wiki post so that the guidelines relate to Social Coding Movement. I am very happy with the contents of the document. The Mozilla CoC lends itself very well for a Movement like ours, in their breadth and scope and the thoughtful formulations it uses.
I have added the guidelines to a community repository on Codeberg, from where it can be referenced from other locations, in similar way as shown above.
I just found this post by @mayel containing reference to a paper Designing Care and Commoning into a Code of Conduct (PDF) by Cindy Kohtala of the Aalto University, Finland. It may have some nice further insights to improve our participation guidelines.
Despite claims to being counterculture and a better alternative, grassroots activist design groups and free culture movements may replicate the marginalizing behaviours of dominant society, also in their governance and designs of their interaction platforms. We developed a code-of-conduct, or Community Guidelines, for our online commons- oriented group to nurture a sense of a caring and mutually responsible community. The guidelines aim to bring into online interaction the living person-to-person dialogic relationality we exhibit in collaborative work offline. Our social learning process could have implications for designing healthier online community protocols and platforms and be able to better tackle the challenges of intersectionality.
There’s still a couple of small things to do on the Social Coding Community Participation Guidelines, like hosting at conduct.coding.social
But the guidelines describing the actual Code of Conduct is only part of the Well-being process of a community or project. Actually enforcing the CoC in an inclusive, fair, and transparent manner is most important. And the way that is done needs to be well thought out and documented.
There’s a free e-book on the subject written by Valerie Aurora and Marie Gardiner:
In follow-up to mention of these guidelines (as published in participate.coding.social) on the Fediverse @msavoritias posted a follow-up on providing examples of a good CoC (in my mind) and also good rules for community governance.
@erlend in the Muni Town general chatroom mentioned the following resource as a good basis for a Code of Conduct, and it may hold interesting information to improve the Participation Guidelines artifact as well and/or for further well-being procedures to be based on that.
Note that the Social Coding Participation Guidelines are a reusable, independent and crowdsourced artifact, that is not tied to Social coding movement, but can be adopted by anyone, by referring to the guidelines in a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md and in project communication channels.
Idea: Policy cards + pledge framework e.g. responsibletech.work to make Participation a living concept.
This was discussed on the Social experience design chatroom in relationship to:
Pledgewashing: Pledges and manifesto’s not backed by compliance policies become mere PR pamphlets.
Because pledges today aren’t very useful. The Opportunity is to make pledges more valuable: monitorable and reinforcable. And potentially fully intrinsic to our open social stack over time. I know the folks behind Responsible Tech Work and expect them to join social coding in due time. Here you have an example of a budding pledge framework. Alja, one of the co-creators of this initiative is also involved in Tethix as co-founder together with Mat.
@silverpill in the FEP issue tracker on codeberg, made the following comments wrt adopting of the participation guidelines:
The text is quite long and covers offline activities too, but parts that might apply to FEP repository are similar to what already exists in Codeberg Terms Of Service, § 2 Allowed Content & Usage:
You must not share any content that's expressing hate or encouraging violence towards a person or group for any reason. We also explicitly do not tolerate:
Discriminatory behaviour towards and promoting oppression, especially of marginalized groups on grounds of ethnicity, gender, disability, nationality, education, age, and religion.
Violent nationalist propaganda, Nazi symbolism or promoting the ideology of National Socialism.
Mobbing, stalking, doxxing (exposing someone's personal information), brigading (inciting a group to spam a specific place for any reason), threatening and harassment, as well as encouraging others to do those things.
Insults, discriminatory jokes, sexualized comments and other unwanted sexual attention.
Sexually obscene content, including content involving the exploitation or sexualization of minors.
Content that's glorifying violence; that includes any violent material without a proper content warning.
Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg.
All discussions that happen here are subject to those rules. They are more concise than Social Coding Guidelines, and easier to understand, so I think we don’t need to adopt Social Coding Guidelines, unless there is an evidence of a disruptive behavior that is not covered by Codeberg ToS but covered by Social Coding Guidelines.
Yes, indeed. I also like the ‘nutrition label’ idea of policy cards above, and in light of the coding.social site redesign this simple layout is fitting to split the larger chunks of text into separate ‘tabs’.
Btw, part of the redesign/repositioning the new name should be ‘commons participation guidelines’, and this forum will have a ‘commons participation’ dedicated subcategory to discuss improvements.
