Opened 8 months ago

Last modified 3 months ago

#22511 new task

Tor Code of Conduct

Reported by: alison Owned by:
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Community Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords:
Cc: Actual Points:
Parent ID: #22079 Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

To be completed after the membership guidelines are ratified.

Child Tickets

Change History (19)

comment:1 Changed 8 months ago by cypherpunks

WTF? I and my friends sure won't ever follow a CoC and wouldn't want others to follow one. Similarly, anyone who *would* follow it, wouldn't act differently if there was one. ...?

Edit: ad hominem deleted, not original commentator.

Last edited 7 months ago by cypherpunks (previous) (diff)

comment:2 in reply to:  1 ; Changed 8 months ago by arma

Replying to cypherpunks:

WTF? I dislike you

An anonymous flame on a trac thread is not the way to engage on this topic.

To be constructive: the right way to engage on this topic is to first do useful things for Tor and the Tor community, and then people will be excited to listen to your perspective when we are considering things like the code of conduct.

comment:3 in reply to:  2 Changed 8 months ago by cypherpunks

Replying to arma:
No, the point stands.

comment:4 in reply to:  2 ; Changed 8 months ago by cypherpunks

Replying to arma:

To be constructive: the right way to engage on this topic is to first do useful things for Tor and the Tor community, and then people will be excited to listen to your perspective when we are considering things like the code of conduct.

Well, wasn't the obsession with the 'meritocracy'-thing one of the underlying reasons that lead to the *need* of a Code of Conduct, in the first place? Either way, I think it's fair to say, that 'cypherpunks' has been more helpful for than 'alison'...

comment:5 in reply to:  4 ; Changed 7 months ago by isis

Replying to cypherpunks:

Replying to arma:

To be constructive: the right way to engage on this topic is to first do useful things for Tor and the Tor community, and then people will be excited to listen to your perspective when we are considering things like the code of conduct.

Well, wasn't the obsession with the 'meritocracy'-thing one of the underlying reasons that lead to the *need* of a Code of Conduct, in the first place? Either way, I think it's fair to say, that 'cypherpunks' has been more helpful for than 'alison'...


Meritocracy is problematic. However, meritocracy is surprisingly not one of the problems which led to the need for a Code of Conduct in our case; the person who was expelled was a simply a mascot, and—despite repeated public claims to the contrary—was not really a productive contributor. Instead, what we are saying is that you must have, in a sense, a proof of stake in the outcome of the discussions. While we normally welcome contributions to our discussions regardless of their origin, in this case we cannot tolerate outsiders with Opinions coming in and ruining our communal space.

Also: Excuse you. Alison is a wonderful, productive member of our community, whose work has progressively made Tor into a better, safer, kinder place to work and community to be involved in. If anyone with stake in the outcome has a specific complaint, that is to be addressed directly, rather than ad hominem attacks on a Trac ticket.

comment:6 Changed 7 months ago by nickm

Isis speaks true.

comment:7 in reply to:  5 Changed 5 months ago by cypherpunks

Replying to isis:
Just buzzwords, false assumptions, false statements and sophistry.

comment:9 Changed 5 months ago by nickm

Your three-month latency makes me more and more confident that arma was correct above.

comment:10 in reply to:  8 Changed 5 months ago by isis

Replying to cypherpunks:

http://quillette.com/2017/07/18/neurodiversity-case-free-speech/


Yeah, now that's the way to do it, buddy. Link to a white supremacist's blog post. Brilliant. That'll show those politically-correct Tor developers.

comment:11 Changed 4 months ago by cypherpunks

The filer of this ticket, who holds authoritarian views and self-describes as "extreme far left" and a self-avowed member of the violent US group "Antifa", cannot be any kind of leader or representative of the Tor community, firstly because most of us don't share those extreme views, and secondly because their public behavior sets a bad example, e.g constant quarrels on Twitter, bringing a hostile intolerant attitude to anyone who isn't politically American extreme authoritarian far left, and publicly berating teenagers for laughing. That might go down well with the Communist Party, but, in case you are unaware, they find it necessary for their purposes to completely block Tor including bridges.

Last edited 3 months ago by cypherpunks (previous) (diff)

comment:12 Changed 4 months ago by nickm

Go piss up a rope, little cypherpunk.

comment:13 in reply to:  9 Changed 4 months ago by cypherpunks

Replying to nickm:

Your three-month latency makes me more and more confident that arma was correct above.

Or maybe he uses a high-latency anonymity system and has to wait three months just to catch up ;)

comment:14 Changed 4 months ago by cypherpunks

Go piss up a rope, little cypherpunk.

Solid argument. /s
Why don't you ask for that comment to be tweeted by @torproject twitter? Tell @Snowden, too - you know what he thinks. Next, ask again for more people to take the risks of running Tor exits.

Then, read
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/the-restriction-of-political-campaign-intervention-by-section-501c3-tax-exempt-organizations

"public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity."

"activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention."

Last edited 3 months ago by cypherpunks (previous) (diff)

comment:15 in reply to:  11 Changed 4 months ago by cypherpunks

[off-topic comments deleted, please find some blog or something to rant]

Last edited 4 months ago by cypherpunks (previous) (diff)

comment:16 Changed 3 months ago by alison

Hey there folks! I'm happy to report that we did a lot of work on the draft code of conduct at the Montreal meeting. If you want to be involved in finishing this up before it goes out to a vote among core contributors, please contact me directly at alison (at) torproject (dot) org. I'd paste a link to the draft here if this wasn't such a lightning rod for jerks!

comment:17 in reply to:  16 ; Changed 3 months ago by gk

Replying to alison:

Hey there folks! I'm happy to report that we did a lot of work on the draft code of conduct at the Montreal meeting. If you want to be involved in finishing this up before it goes out to a vote among core contributors, please contact me directly at alison (at) torproject (dot) org.

I think there should be drafts available to tor-internal folks way before a final one goes out to a vote. And I think it should not be necessary that each of those tor-internal members not being able to be at the Code of Conduct session is contacting you. Or maybe that comment was only meant for non tor-internal community folks?

comment:18 Changed 3 months ago by atagar

Hi gk. I haven't been involved with the code of conduct but concerning seeing a draft no worries. Our voting policy requires the minimum of a week long discussion phase before any vote. That hasn't been initiated yet...

https://gitweb.torproject.org/community/policies.git/tree/voting.txt#n10

comment:19 in reply to:  17 Changed 3 months ago by alison

Replying to gk:

Replying to alison:

Hey there folks! I'm happy to report that we did a lot of work on the draft code of conduct at the Montreal meeting. If you want to be involved in finishing this up before it goes out to a vote among core contributors, please contact me directly at alison (at) torproject (dot) org.

I think there should be drafts available to tor-internal folks way before a final one goes out to a vote. And I think it should not be necessary that each of those tor-internal members not being able to be at the Code of Conduct session is contacting you. Or maybe that comment was only meant for non tor-internal community folks?

Yeah, sorry to be unclear, when I said "goes out to a vote" I was referring to the whole discussion + voting period to which atagar refers. I was planning to give two weeks for discussion on the list, but anyone is welcome to review it before that if they contact me.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.