Re: Proposal for good developer relationships on the social web

How would you like to move forward?

Evan

On 2025-10-09 2:35 p.m., Darius Kazemi wrote:
> I appreciate the work Evan put into this but I don't understand the 
> purpose of such a statement. We already know that we work together 
> under the W3C CoC and policies. If there had been some notable breach 
> of this behavior by the CG I would support a public re-affirmation of 
> those values but thankfully there hasn't been. I imagine a statement 
> like this would just lead to a bunch of head-scratching by onlookers. 
> Indeed I am currently head-scratching at it and I have full context.
>
> The original letter 
> <https://writings.thisismissem.social/statement-on-discourse-about-activitypub-and-at-protocol/> 
> was something I enthusiastically signed because it was bringing 
> something new to the discourse: claims about ways to move the web 
> forward by working together and suggesting a convergent design 
> direction for two specific protocols, AT and AP. The current proposal 
> brings one new thing: an extension of expected behavior outside the CG 
> context, just reads to me like a minor scolding or at best a claim 
> that our values as the CG are the correct baseline for discourse in 
> general, neither of which I support.
>
> -Darius
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 9:12 AM Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name> wrote:
>
>     Last week, I spent some time talking with Emelia Smith about
>     cooperation with other developer communities on the social web,
>     outside of the ActivityPub and Indie Web ecosystems. We thought
>     that making a proposal that the CG could pass as a resolution
>     would be a good step forward.
>
>     I volunteered to write a compact, proposal-ready statement. Here's
>     the first draft:
>
>     /PROPOSED: Our Community Group includes members that focus on the
>     ActivityPub, Indie Web, ATProto, Nostr and DSNP ecosystems. We
>     re-commit ourselves to working together in this group under the
>     W3C Code of Conduct https://www.w3.org/policies/code-of-conduct/
>     and the General Communications Policies for W3C Community Groups
>     https://www.w3.org/community/about/process/#general-policies . We
>     further commit to hold ourselves to the same standard of conduct
>     with social web developers//, regardless of the protocol they work
>     with,// outside of the Community group context, in public or
>     private, such as in online discussions or in-person meetings./
>
>     I think this grounds our expected behaviour in already
>     well-established policies. It reemphasizes the level of behaviour
>     we all committed to when we joined the group. And it extends our
>     expected level of behaviour outside of the CG context (mailing
>     list, meetings, GitHub, forums) to other contexts as well.
>
>     I can put this up on my private GitHub repo or add it to the SWICG
>     repos, or just add it to the agenda for the November meeting (TPAC).
>
>     Evan
>