[Haskell-community] Civility notes (was "Traversable instances for (, , ) a b")

Thu Apr 6 10:56:32 UTC 2017

YEAH ld be cool with that one too.

Ultimately as long as we give each other constructive feedback it's all
good.

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 8:26 PM Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <
ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com> wrote:

> This isn't too bad, but if we must have a CoC I would prefer something
> based upon [Wheaton's Law] (admittedly, it's probably more open to
> abuse due to lack of defining terms).
>
> Wheaton's Law: http://www.wheatonslaw.com/
>
> On 6 April 2017 at 10:11, Carter Schonwald <carter.schonwald at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/conduct/
> >
> > looks pretty reasonable. i like how it makes clear intent while not being
> > very "rules lawyery", because at the end of the day human judgment and
> > feedback is what matters
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Tikhon Jelvis <tikhon at jelv.is> wrote:
> >>
> >> Just had a chance to look at Ruby's CoC, as suggested by Francesco
> Ariis.
> >> It looks like exactly what I had in mind.
> >>
> >> I agree with Tom that starting with an existing code would be a good
> idea
> >> and, if we do decide to do it, my vote is definitely for Ruby's over the
> >> alternatives I've seen.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:25 PM, <amindfv at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> El 5 abr 2017, a las 13:20, Jakub Daniel <jakub.daniel at gmail.com>
> >>> escribió:
> >>>
> >>> What is the expected effect/role of CoC? Is it expected that people
> would
> >>> actually exhibit different behaviour because of a document? Is there a
> >>> reason to believe good behaviour in other communities come from
> existing
> >>> CoCs? I honestly doubt people prone to violate such rules tend to read
> such
> >>> documents and since there is no way to enforce it, what point is there?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If you'll forgive a strained metaphor: imagine you arrive in an
> >>> unfamiliar land, one which has a reputation for the occasional food
> fight.
> >>> You're wearing nice clothes and don't want your day ruined by getting
> food
> >>> on them. Some restaurants have a big sign out front: "Absolutely NO
> food
> >>> fighting. Anyone caught food fighting will be ejected". Other
> restaurants
> >>> don't have the sign. When picking a place to eat, aren't you likely to
> >>> gravitate to a restaurant which has a sign?
> >>>
> >>> Isn't the effort to maintain such a document just a waste?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hopefully it'll be very low-maintenance!
> >>>
> >>> Tom
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 5 Apr 2017, at 20:54, amindfv at gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'm also +1 to a CoC, although have less of an opinion on what shape it
> >>> should take. CoCs are an effective way of making people who may feel
> like
> >>> outsiders to a community feel more welcome. The Haskell community is
> amazing
> >>> and inclusive but not the most diverse, and projects which are doing
> better
> >>> on that front largely all have CoCs.
> >>>
> >>> In terms of what shape it takes: there are lots of off-the-shelf ones
> for
> >>> different needs: I'd suggest picking one of them.
> >>>
> >>> Tom
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> El 5 abr 2017, a las 11:44, Paolo Giarrusso <p.giarrusso at gmail.com>
> >>> escribió:
> >>>
> >>> Rust's code of conduct (and the conduct of leaders) have been very
> >>> successful at creating a welcoming community. However, those rules were
> >>> there from the start.
> >>>
> >>> What's crucial is that a code of conduct is really agreed upon by a
> >>> community and its elders. So thanks to Simon Peyton Jones for starting
> this
> >>> conversation.
> >>> In particular, a CoC to address known issues (not just in the present
> >>> discussion) would probably be easier to agree on.
> >>>
> >>> > We should *assume* people set out to be kind and courteous and help
> >>> > them do that consistently.
> >>>
> >>> The guideline I find useful is "assume good faith" (used for instance
> in
> >>> Wikipedia), as long as you don't have extraordinary evidence. And
> that's a
> >>> guidelines that needs to be stated.
> >>> Opinions on politeness in the wild are much more varied. How polite do
> >>> you need to be, if somebody insists on being wrong? And with actual
> trolls?
> >>>
> >>> > Why is the idea that "everything is a tradeoff" enshrined as a rule?
> >>>
> >>> I don't know if it's a strict rule there, how strict it should be, or
> >>> whether it works in a CoC. But I find it a very good guideline for
> educated
> >>> debate. I learned it (implicitly) in my academic PL training: PL
> design is
> >>> founded on math but is no science yet. Debate in hard sciences is
> different.
> >>>
> >>> Because this rule is in fact fundamental to establish respect under
> >>> disagreement. The Rust CoC says "There is *seldom* a right answer." If
> a
> >>> question has a right answer, the others become wrong, misguided,
> heretics,
> >>> .... idiots... OK, you can censor the word "idiot", but that won't help
> >>> much. Or you can admit that reasonable people might disagree on
> `Foldable
> >>> ((,) a)` (as most already agree), and give that as a guideline, just as
> >>> "assume good faith". That doesn't make "2 + 2 = 5" legitimate of
> course—some
> >>> "common sense" is still needed.
> >>>
> >>> "There is *seldom* a right answer" is an unstated rule in academic
> papers
> >>> (where it's implied by peer review), and it IMHO works rather well
> there,
> >>> even on the few academics who will loudly proclaim elsewhere there is a
> >>> right answer.
> >>>
> >>> Indeed, I don't want to misrepresent SPJ, but I feel he is often happy
> to
> >>> talk about Haskell tradeoffs when they're there, even when others
> loudly
> >>> proclaim Haskell is strictly and clearly better than X.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Paolo
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 3, 2017 10:55, "Tikhon Jelvis" <tikhon at jelv.is> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Personally, I would not be against a *short and simple* code of
> conduct
> >>>> that specifically addresses issues we have seen. I'm imagining clear
> >>>> guidelines that help people express themselves in a thoughtful and
> polite
> >>>> way. Something in the style of the Hacker News commenting
> guidelines[1] (at
> >>>> least the first four; the rest are specific to HN/Reddit-like sites).
> >>>>
> >>>> One of the best examples I've seen in the wild had a single rule: no
> >>>> personal attacks. It's simple to understand and follow with no risk of
> >>>> stifling or derailing real discussions, and yet unambiguously rules
> out the
> >>>> majority of rude comments I see online (ignoring spam and outright
> >>>> trolling).
> >>>>
> >>>> I do *not* like Rust's code of conduct specifically. It does not
> provide
> >>>> clear guidelines on civility/politeness and covers too many other
> things,
> >>>> including a lot of (often political) baggage. Why is the idea that
> >>>> "everything is a tradeoff" enshrined as a rule? The rule on
> politeness is
> >>>> clearly deemphasized: "Please be kind and courteous. There’s no need
> to be
> >>>> mean or rude." is so vague it may as well not be in the code of
> conduct. We
> >>>> should *assume* people set out to be kind and courteous and help them
> do
> >>>> that consistently. The "Citizen Code of Conduct" they link to has
> even more
> >>>> baggage and I believe it should *not* serve as the basis for anything
> we
> >>>> might adopt as a community.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html see section "In
> >>>> Comments"
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Simon Peyton Jones via
> Haskell-community
> >>>> <haskell-community at haskell.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Friends
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I second what Tom says below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Almost everyone expresses their views with respect, even when
> >>>>> disagreeing.  The exceptions are (in my guess) mostly unintentional,
> at
> >>>>> least in the extent of the offence caused.   That does not make them
> >>>>> unimportant, because a slow slippage in our collective standards is,
> over
> >>>>> time corrosive.  But it does mean that we can draw breath, as Tom has
> >>>>> helpfully done here, and without condemning anyone reset our
> standards.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I’ve been talking to a couple of people about whether it would be
> >>>>> useful to have an explicit Haskell Community Code of Conduct.  Many
> online
> >>>>> communities have one (e.g. Rust), and it might be helpful for
> everyone to
> >>>>> have a concrete baseline rather than an unwritten standard.  Any
> views on
> >>>>> that?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Simon
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Libraries [mailto:libraries-bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of
> Tom
> >>>>> Murphy
> >>>>> Sent: 02 April 2017 19:18
> >>>>> To: Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiexcel at gmail.com>
> >>>>> Cc: libraries <libraries at haskell.org>
> >>>>> Subject: Civility notes (was "Traversable instances for (,,) a b")
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Fumiaki!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      I agree with you that some poorly-chosen words by a few people
> >>>>> have soured this conversation, but please don't let that turn you
> completely
> >>>>> off of the productive conversation most of us are attempting to
> have! I
> >>>>> think it's largely been successful, too: even if many of us haven't
> changed
> >>>>> our -1/+1 votes, I for one have had my ideas challenged and have a
> more
> >>>>> nuanced view than before talking with everyone here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      Henning and Edward are two examples (one from each side of the
> >>>>> +1/-1 chasm) who have been aided by this discussion, in making
> important
> >>>>> progress to finding a middle ground (each in the form of proposed
> compiler
> >>>>> changes).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      To the rest of us: Fumiaki regretting having posted here is a
> >>>>> pretty stark example of why speaking politely matters. People being
> scared
> >>>>> away and feeling unwelcome is a real phenomenon, and we need to do
> our part
> >>>>> to fix it. I'd propose:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      - If you haven't read it already, SPJ recently wrote a heartfelt
> >>>>> letter on the subject [0]. We've gotten better since then, but
> clearly we're
> >>>>> not finished.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      - Civility is a norm, and norms sometimes need to be enforced.
> >>>>> From a distance, we all look bad (and unwelcoming!) if anyone is
> hostile and
> >>>>> we don't make it clear it's not acceptable. Speak up! That said,
> everyone
> >>>>> makes mistakes - try to give people space to apologize and move on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      - If someone says something insulting to you, please take that
> as
> >>>>> a sign to become more polite, not less so. The downward spiral is
> real.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      If you're called out for saying something regrettable (again,
> >>>>> regardless of if you're +1 or -1 on this issue), *please* take our
> desire
> >>>>> for civil conversation seriously. Responses like (I'm paraphrasing,
> and not
> >>>>> trying to cite anyone specifically): "It was a joke (mostly)" and
> "It's your
> >>>>> fault if you didn't get the joke" are worse than not writing
> anything at
> >>>>> all. Ideal would be a quick "Sorry!"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks, all!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tom
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [0]
> >>>>>
> https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2016-September/024995.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Fumiaki Kinoshita
> >>>>> <fumiexcel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The discussion has diverged to flaming due to a few offensive
> people. I
> >>>>> guess I shouldn't have posted a proposal here, I should have
> submitted a
> >>>>> patch instead.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2017-03-23 19:53 GMT+09:00 Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiexcel at gmail.com>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's surprising that they are missing (forgive me, I'm not here to
> make
> >>>>> people grumpy).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Libraries mailing list
> >>>>> Libraries at haskell.org
> >>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Haskell-community mailing list
> >>>>> Haskell-community at haskell.org
> >>>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Haskell-community mailing list
> >>>> Haskell-community at haskell.org
> >>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Haskell-community mailing list
> >>> Haskell-community at haskell.org
> >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-community
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Libraries mailing list
> >>> Libraries at haskell.org
> >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Libraries mailing list
> >>> Libraries at haskell.org
> >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Libraries mailing list
> >>> Libraries at haskell.org
> >>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Libraries mailing list
> >> Libraries at haskell.org
> >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Libraries mailing list
> > Libraries at haskell.org
> > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
> Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
> http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20170406/915cd7dd/attachment-0001.html>