Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add code of conduct minimal neutral guarantees #213

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add code of conduct minimal neutral guarantees #213

Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2dcb094
Add code of conduct minimal neutral guarantees
ariard Jul 13, 2023
f502984
Request code of conduct members 50 commits / 2y exp
ariard Jul 14, 2023
fa82902
Remove the formality and extend to 3y
ariard Jul 14, 2023
244e421
Define deadlock, staggered approach and PoW for active contributors
ariard Jul 25, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions docs/code_of_conduct.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -20,13 +20,22 @@ Private or public harassment of any kind will not be tolerated. Since harassment

Additionally, spam and other content which disrupts or prevents LDK contributors from working on LDK is not acceptable.

In case of a concrete issue that raises a deadlock about the application of the code of conduct, 2 additional members should be selected by consensus of the code of conduct team from the community of
active LDK contributors to join the team in its decision-making process to adjudicate the case. The decision of the majority of the 5 members is binding.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does the "normal" CoC always consist of 3 members? What would an example of a deadlock look like here?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes “normal” CoC currently consists of 3 members. Note latest modification proposes to bump the number to 5 at next nomination in 2025 (for the staggered approach).

Latest changes introduces the definition of a deadlock, which is just when there is no unanimity between the 3 CoC members on the decision to take and therefore bumping to 5 allow to unlock the situation, hopefully. So in practice a deadlock can be any material event defined as unacceptable behavior, it’s just when there is no formal unanimity in the decision-making process.

## The Code of Conduct Team

A small team of LDK contributors has volunteered to enforce the LDK Code of Conduct. If you feel like a community member has engaged in inappropriate behavior, please don't hesitate to contact one of the following LDK contributors via email or on Discord:
* Matt Corallo - ldkcocpoc on mattcorallo.com
* Val Wallace - vwallace on protonmail.com
* Devrandom - devrandom99 on proton.me

The Code of Conduct team should be renew every 3 years with a transparent nomination process opened to the whole community of active LDK contributors.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit:

Suggested change
The Code of Conduct team should be renew every 3 years with a transparent nomination process opened to the whole community of active LDK contributors.
The Code of Conduct team should be renewed every 3 years with a transparent nomination process open to the whole community of active LDK contributors.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the staggered approach mentioned, so happy to have that included here :)

As for nominations, I do hear the concerns of Matt around people really vying for the position (who actually might have bad intents). I don't know of a good solution to this, but for me at least the staggered approach and having it 3 years instead of 2 can provide some stability and handover if other candidates ever wish to be nominated.

I think we need to address what happens in the special case of a current CoC member who wants to step down, is there an early nomination? Are there acting-members on the bench to fill that role until the end of a term?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Included the staggered approach mention.

On the concern raised by Matt about people vying for the position, I think requesting updated technical proof-of-work both for CoC members and for the active LDK contributors taking part to the nomination process ensure those nominated to the roles are productive contributors giving priority to technical development over playing bureaucracy games.

In case of current CoC member who wants to step down, added a new sentence where the role can be fulfilled with a new nomination instantly. I think it’s better to guarantee a minimal number of people part of the Code of Conduct team as you can expect better decisions to be taken from the rational discussion of multiple independent viewpoint.

Overall a code of conduct is an attempt to find a reasonable middle ground among the the disagreements regarding expression in a middle-scale and diverse community of people from all around the world, IMHO.


The next nomination should happen in December 2025. Current Code of conduct team members can be reconducted in their roles.

Code of conduct team members should have realized at least 50 code commits in the main LDK git tree and the first commit should have been merged more than 2 years at the date of nomination.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure I understand this phrasing did you mean "more than 2 years prior to the date of nomination" or "in the 2 years leading up to the date of the nomination"? Also, above it says 10 commits, now it says 50. I'd prefer 50, but don't feel super strongly, it should be consistent though.


## The Code of Conduct Team’s Responsibilities

Team members are tasked with responding to reports within 24 hours. They will review each incident and determine, to the best of their ability:
Expand Down