[ghc-steering-committee] Dealing with abuse on the issue tracker

[Jakob Brünker]

> Curiously, I don't see a direct violation of any HF Guideline as I
interpret them

I think it does go against the " We strive to be scrupulously polite at all
times." point, though of course that's somewhat subjective.

But since the HF Guidelines don't actually pertain directly to the GHC
proposal discussions, perhaps a good first step would be to actually create
a code of conduct that is stated to apply to participants in these
discussions, so that we have something concrete to point to. This could be
more or less a copy of the HF guidelines. (Though I would prefer doing
something more than just* referring to* the HF Guidelines; that would seem
confusing since it specifically states that it applies to members of a
Haskell commitee, rather than discussion participants.)

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 11:16 AM Sebastian Graf <sgraf1337 at gmail.com> wrote:

> What I found quite derailing upon reading the very first comment was that
> it raises two non-issues:
>
>    1. that the proposal should generalise to more keywords than just
>    `type` (it does!)
>    2. that the proposed change could somehow make typos valid programs
>    (it does not; .type must be surrounded by parens (.type), and such a typo
>    would likely trigger a syntax error *even if* -XOverloadedRecordDot was
>    active)
>
> Reading such troll-ish posts (even if the author did not mean to troll)
> often triggers a strong urge in me to reply to correct these perceived
> misconceptions.
> Soon I'm not the only one replying. The troll (by perceived function, not
> by self-declaration) keeps on fueling the discussion with ever new
> contentious material, at which point the discussion has been successfully
> derailed.
> Everyone participating in the discussion *feels* like they are helping,
> but in reality they are sadly just providing more fuel.
>
> I do not know enough about moderation practices to emphatically suggest a
> solution.
> Of course it helps if the committee itself does not engage with trolls,
> but there are many other people with a GitHub account who might still
> engage (and they do!).
> In the present case, the proposal author engaged with the troll as well.
>
> That highlights an important issue: *The proposal author is supposed to
> defend their proposal against critique, and rebut any which is invalid.*
> In other words: *it might seem like it is the job* of the proposal author
> to engage with trolls.
> (Of course, ultimately only critique from the committee needs addressing,
> but I think it's "good practice" to rebut early.)
> If I was a proposal author and the troll accepted a rebuttal as an
> invitation for more inflammatory discussion that went un-moderated, I would
> be upset about the experience.
> I think that is what happened here. Curiously, I don't see a direct
> violation of any HF Guideline as I interpret them, but to me it feels like
> the whole discussion was started by the troll in bad faith.
>
> Am Di., 23. Juli 2024 um 09:36 Uhr schrieb Simon Peyton Jones <
> simon.peytonjones at gmail.com>:
>
>> I'm curious what the other committee members think about this.
>>
>>
>> I am very concerned when conversations stray outside the Haskell
>> Foundation Guidelines for Respectful Communication.
>> <https://haskell.foundation/guidelines-for-respectful-communication/>
>> But I am often very unsure what to do about it.
>>
>> In this case, though, it doesn't look terrible.  Matt is clearly saying
>> (albeit in rather intemperate language) that he feels unwelcome, but
>> actually the thread does not look bad.   Some people supporting, some
>> suggesting caution ("that might be dangerously close to a typo") and some
>> (IMHO totally unjustified) sarcasm ("Oh, hang on ... is the date April 1st
>> where you are?").
>>
>> How does it come over to all of you?   Any advice or suggestions?
>>
>> Anyway, I'll write to Mike.  Thanks for flagging it Moritz.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 at 08:24, Moritz Angermann <
>> moritz.angermann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Committee members,
>>>
>>> I'd like to bring the following tweet (thread) from Matt to your
>>> attention:
>>> https://x.com/mattoflambda/status/1815536812376707224
>>>
>>> It concerns pull request: Allow reserved identifiers as fields in
>>> `OverloadedRecordDot` by parsonsmatt · Pull Request #668 ·
>>> ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals (github.com)
>>> <https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/668>.
>>>
>>> We do not seem to be as welcoming as we could/should be?
>>>
>>> My stance in general around this is probably a bit old fashioned, and
>>> what I learned on IRC back then: not to fuel and engage with negative
>>> behavior.
>>>
>>> I'm curious what the other committee members think about this.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>  Moritz
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20240724/5d65d2e7/attachment.html>