Re: Some thoughts about Diversity and the CoC
On December 12, 2019 3:01:26 PM UTC, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
>>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> writes:
>
>
> Scott> I think you reinforce my original point. In this case, the
> Scott> 'other side' isn't the proposer of the option, it's me.
>
> Scott> What I'm hearing is that the CoC isn't for people like me
> Scott> because you are completely dismissive of my discomfort.
>
>Given that Simon has his preference, what would you prefer to have
>happened?
>Are you saying you wish there were options on the ballot both with and
>without diversity?
>Are you asking for your concern to be acknowledged, but perhaps not for
>some other change?
>How would you like for us to value both Simon 's position and your
>concern?
>
>These are serious questions.
>I don't want to be dismissive, and I understand how it might come
>across
>that way.
I think when people personally feel excluded/diminished/pick your term then it's appropriate to work on how to frame things to see how to make them feel welcome (e.g. if someone is more comfortable being referred to by they, then I think it's appropriate to use it). That's not how I read Simon's request. I read as being speculative that maybe the wording might make someone uncomfortable, not about anything they were directly experiencing.
To me that's on the other side of a reasonableness line. In my view it's trying to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist. In a global volunteer project that touches thousands of people, the question of what is guaranteed not to offend anyone is actually pretty easy to answer: nothing or vanishingly close to it.
I believe the approach of solving 'maybe someone will be offended' problems preemptively leads to significantly greater restrictions on speech than are needed to meet the goal of the CoC (which I think is a good goal).
Given that the word diversity was being used in a very normal way and no one was claiming to feel excluded by its use, I think the right response would have been "thanks for the input, we'll keep an eye out for it being a problem".
No, I don't think more options would help.
What I would like to have happen is for people to confine their language complaints to either narrow cases that are well established to be problematic or things that make them personally feel unwelcome in the project. I recognize I might not get that.
Thanks for listening,
Scott K
Reply to: