Re: Proposed Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC) (Call for Review)

Couple of quick minor pull-requests as promised for now for your
consideration, thumb up/down, comments:
* https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/141
* https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/pull/142
Will follow-up with one or more issues after the weekend. Thanks, Tantek

On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 1:20 AM Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> Dear AC Reps and editors of the CEPC,
>
> I tried to submit the following answer on behalf of Mozilla to
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/CEPC2020/ but apparently got an
> error upon submitting, so am submitting via text instead.
>
> Please include our response in the archive of official responses.
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/CEPC2020/results
>
> I hope you are able to consider the suggested changes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tantek Çelik
> Mozilla AC Representative.
>
> ===================
>
> I, Tantek Çelik
> W3C Advisory Committee representative for Mozilla
>
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Decision for adopting updated W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
> >
> > ----
> > Regarding the proposal to supersede the 2015 CEPC, my organization:
> >
> >
>
>  * ( ) supports adoption as the W3C CEPC as is.
>  * (*) suggests changes, but supports adoption as the W3C CEPC whether or
> not the changes are adopted (your details below).
>  * ( ) suggests changes, and only supports adoption as the W3C CEPC if the
> changes are adopted [Formal Objection] (your details below).
>  * ( ) suggests the document not be adopted as the W3C CEPC [Formal
> Objection] (your details below).
>  * ( ) abstains from this review.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Other Comments
> >
> > ----
> > Please add here any other comments you have.
> >
> >
> Comments:
>
> The proposed revision to the CEPC is a significant improvement over
> the 2015 CEPC.
>
> We suggest the following brief changes, and will file issues (or pull
> requests where the changes are clear) accordingly.
>
> 1. In section 4 (https://www.w3.org/2020/05/CEPC#Reporting), change
> all occurrences of "law enforcement" to "emergency services". There is
> a long history of incidents where contacting law enforcement
> inevitably results in physical harm up to and including death directly
> due to the actions of law enforcement, especially towards minorities.
> In the past two months there has been increasing awareness of these
> incidents, especially in the United States
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_brutality_in_the_United_States),
> and other countries as well
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_brutality#Examples).
>
> As a code that seeks to minimize and reduce harms, it behooves us as
> W3C to acknowledge these ongoing harms and strike all mentions of "law
> enforcement" from our code of conduct, with the possible exception of
> adding an explicit mention of the unacceptability of contacting (or
> threatening to contact) law enforcement as a method of causing harm
> (AKA weaponizing, e.g.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_birdwatching_incident),
> bullying, or even just expressing discomfort about an individual
> acting "suspiciously" (e.g.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elijah_McClain).
>
> 2. In section 3.2
> (https://www.w3.org/2020/05/CEPC#unacceptablebehavior), add "caste" to
> the first list item, perhaps between "ethnicity, nationality", e.g.
> replace that with "ethnicity, caste, nationality". We explicitly list
> "caste" in a similar list in the Mozilla Community Participation
> Guidelines (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/participation/)
> and believe the CEPC would also benefit from this explicit addition.
>
> 3. In section 6. (https://www.w3.org/2020/05/CEPC#glossary), the
> definition of "Sexual harassment" seems oddly narrowly scoped to
> "employment", "work performance", or "working environment". This
> narrowness in scope seems to be in conflict with the much broader
> contexts of W3C related interactions, e.g. as listed in section 1
> (https://www.w3.org/2020/05/CEPC#introduction). For example,
> interactions in W3C contexts between individuals who have no
> employment or direct work or work environment relationship should
> still be covered. In addition this definition (with
> id="dfn-sexually-harass") does not appear to be linked or referenced
> from elsewhere in the document. We don't have a specific suggestion
> for how to improve this definition and leave it up to the editors to
> do so.
>
> Thank you again for a greatly improved CEPC. We hope you consider our
> suggested changes as minor enough to be made as part of this update.
> Thanks for your consideration.

Received on Saturday, 27 June 2020 20:50:32 UTC