Re: Next steps and note to mailing list about Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct

On 02/20/2015 03:13 AM, Colin Gallagher wrote:
> Actually, no, I don't believe my behavior is inappropriate at all.
> 
> I consider my remarks pointedly accurate in the context they were made at
> the time they were made.
> 
> I also see, however, that the management of this list has become
> inflexible, and I would recommend changes be made in that regard.  If you
> disagree with my statements, take it up with your local ombudsman.

To clarify, here is the link to the latest version of the Code of
Behavior and Ethics:

http://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/

Comments about the document may be sent to the Positive Work Environment
task force:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pwe/

The process with regards the ombudsman is laid out here:

http://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/#Procedures

Again, it is our hope that behavior on the mailing list can remain civil
and in line with the code of behavior. Note this applies across all W3C
mailing lists and changes to the policy are out of scope for this
mailing list.

This is actually the second time we've brought this up as well, see here:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-security/2014Oct/0040.html

However, we felt a reminder was necessary given there have been, since
we first mentioned it, a number of specific incidents.

   cheers,
       harry

> 
> -c
> 
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 02/20/2015 01:44 AM, Colin Gallagher wrote:
>>> Harry, I know you know this, but does everyone realize that the
>> Netiquette
>>> document linked within as part of the document Procedures, is from 1995?
>>>
>>> In light of some of the remarks I've made to the list, and my criticisms
>> of
>>> web wallets and the information collection that can result from them, and
>>> comparisons I've made to today's information 'management' to the
>>> information collection and group labeling conducted by Nazi Germany in
>>> WWII, I may as well continue in this vein, risking what may be viewed as
>>> further unproductive remarks... to say that a Netiquette document made in
>>> 1995 that is being used in 2015 (twenty years later) is itself worthy of
>>> questioning and review by any participants who may use it or be subjected
>>> to it, for example.
>>
>> After internal discussion, W3C still operates by that code of ethics and
>> professional conduct and currently sees no reason to change it.
>>
>>>
>>> Of course, civility is well and good and should be welcomed in any
>>> conversation, but censorship in any form (and indeed much of society is
>>> already there) should surely not be.  This very subject is also being
>>> debated on a completely different forum
>>> <
>> https://bitcoinfoundation.org/forum/index.php?/topic/1234-considerit-civility-pledge-and-being-civil/page__st__20#entry13304
>>>
>>> for those interested in it.
>>
>> After a certain number of participants complain that trolling behavior
>> is not only counter-productive but making people feel personally
>> uncomfortable,  we had an internal discussion and decided that we'd like
>> to remind people that we at W3C do have a code of ethics and
>> professional conduct which applies to all lists. If you feel your
>> behavior may be questionable, please review it.
>>
>> We generally don't bring it up, but we do understand that some people
>> may not be aware of it. If anyone thinks that a code of ethics and
>> professional conduct is unnecessary, you may simply either leave the
>> list or take it up with the ombudsman if you feel it is being applied
>> unfairly.
>>
>>     cheers,
>>           harry
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd like to remind everyone that while we at W3C are not responding in
>>>> detail to every email, we are carefully watching the conversation evolve
>>>> and eagerly looking forward to technical proposals that can build
>>>> consensus. We know discussions can be fraught with disagreement and  can
>>>> be difficult, but we believe the use-cases that motivate improved
>>>> authentication, cryptography, and the use of hardware tokens on the Web
>>>> are crucial to the future of the Open Web.
>>>>
>>>> However, several times on this mailing list we've had behavior, both
>>>> onlist and even off-list, that some are viewing as not particularly
>>>> constructive. In response to these complaints, we'd like to draw the
>>>> attention of everyone to the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/
>>>>
>>>> We understand that e-mails are often sent in haste and emotions can run
>>>> high, but we must remember to treat each other with respect,
>>>> professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and
>>>> strengths. While we have perhaps been lax in this, from now on we will
>>>> enforce our Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct:  patterns of
>>>> behavior that systematically violate the code of conduct will be
>>>> referred to an ombudsman for determination of next steps, and a personal
>>>> note will be sent beforehand. However, we believe that we can overcome
>>>> our differences and reach consensus on the next steps for securing the
>> Web.
>>>>
>>>>    yours,
>>>>          harry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Received on Friday, 20 February 2015 02:35:15 UTC