path: root/code-of-conduct.txt

SIPB Social Principles

SIPB is an awesome place for interacting with computers, but there are
people here too! Sometimes though, the line between these gets blurred
in our heads, and we end up interacting with people like they are
machines, which results in a sour experience for all parties involved.
So, we've come up with a set of core principles that we feel is
important to keep in mind when interacting with our mortal
counterparts:

1) People don't remember what you tell them, they remember how you
make them feel.

2) Be sincere.

3) Don't be a jerk.

4) Keep (1) through (3) *especially* in mind when interacting online:
email, zephyr, etc. Computers have a knack for making human
interactions less than human.

Sounds simple, right? Unfortunately, it isn't. People aren't usually
purposefully being unfeeling, insincere, or a jerk, but it still
happens; c.f. computers vs. humans, we're not perfect. So, we've also
collected guidelines regarding common examples of where people forget
these principles and accidentally contribute to a junky social
environment.  They're not comprehensive, but we think they catch the
most common pitfalls.

Perfection is not required for participation

We want people to participate in SIPB projects without feeling like
they're going to get flamed for not knowing very much. Obviously, this
means that you shouldn't be chastising prospectives for making
mistakes. Less obviously, you shouldn't be chastising people who
"should know better" in public, either.  Remember that prospectives
are listening (in the office, on zephyr, on email lists, etc.) and
might think that such criticism might be directed at them if they make
an error.

This doesn't mean you can't give people suggestions on how to do
better, but please don't do so in a way that suggests that they're bad
person for doing what they did, that they should have done better, or
that their contribution wasn't worth making.

No feigning surprise

This first principle is aimed at discouraging the practice of acting
overly surprised when some says they don't know something.  This
applies to both technical things ("What?! I can't believe you don't
know what Hesiod is!") and non-technical things ("You don't know who
RMS is?!").  That's not to say you may not be genuinely surprised when
someone doesn't know something that you have taken for granted.  But
consider whether the person, who has already admitted to not knowing
something, wants to be further reminded of it by your reaction.

Feigning surprise has absolutely no social or educational benefit:
When people feign surprise, it's usually to make them feel better
about themselves or demonstrate their vast array of knowledge at the
expense of others' emotions.  Even when that's not the intention, it's
almost always the effect.  We want SIPB to be a place where people
feel safe saying "I don't know" or "I don't understand", because those
are the first steps to learning.  We don't want an environment where
people don't feel like a "real" SIPB member/prospective because they
don't know what wget(1) or nc(1) are.

No well-actually's

A well-actually[2] happens when someone says something that's almost -
but not entirely - correct, and you say, "well, actually..." and then
give a _minor_ correction. This is especially annoying when the
correction has no bearing on the actual conversation. This doesn't
mean SIPB isn't about truth-seeking or that we don't care about being
precise.  However, many well-actually's are, like feigning surprise,
primarily about (intentionally or unintentionately) demonstrating
one's own knowledge, not truth-seeking.

While "Well, actually" may be appropriate when conveying a major
correction or preventing someone from making a dangerous mistake, you
may wish to consider finding a different way to say it.  In short:
"People don't remember what you tell them, they remember how you make
them feel."[1]

Back-seat driving can be disruptive

If you overhear people working through a problem, you shouldn't
intermittently lob advice across the room. This can lead to the "too
many cooks" problem, but more important, it can be rude and disruptive
to half-participate in a conversation. This isn't to say you shouldn't
help, offer advice, or join conversations. On the contrary, we
encourage all those things. Rather, it just means that when you want
to help out or work with others, you should fully engage and not just
butt in sporadically.

Somewhat relatedly, when one person is trying to explain a tool or
concept, keep in mind that they may have a plan for what order they're
going to introduce ideas in. It can be very disruptive to have
somebody interject with something you weren't planning to cover until
later, and need to rearrange your ordering.

No subtle sexism, racism, etc.

Our next principle bans subtle sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.
(Overt prejudice is, of course, right out.)  This one is different
from the ones above it, because it's often not a specific, observable
phenomenon ("well-actually's" are easy to spot because they almost
always start with the words "well, actually...").

Unlike the other guidelines, incidents which violate this principle
may not be a comment directed at a specific individual.  In situations
like this, anyone who observes the behavior should feel empowered to
talk to the people involved or bring it to the attention of the EC.

If someone says a comment you made was sexist, racist, or otherwise
discriminatory, please do not enter into a protracted debate about it,
and never tell someone that their feelings are not valid.  Instead,
apologize and move on.  If, after reflecting on your comment, you
still genuinely do not see any bias in your comment, you can contact a
member of the EC to discuss the incident further.

The most sincere apologies consist of "I'm sorry"

An apology should be a sincere expression of sadness for the sadness of
others.  If you violate one of the principles in this document, but then
qualify your apology with "...that", "...if", "..but", you're implying
that the other person shares some of the blame for the incident.  Since
they're the one who's upset, that's not true.  You may not have intended
to make them feel bad, but you did, and saying "I'm sorry" shows that
you regret that they feel bad (which, hopefully, you do.)

Sometimes, people are tempted to say "I'm sorry, but" (etc.) because
they don't want to concede their point in a discussion.  But this sort
of "I'm sorry" isn't really an apology, and is an insincere use of the
words.  Being sorry that someone else feels bad doesn't mean that you
necessarily agree with them, it just means that you recognize that
they're upset and wish that weren't the case.  This is an opportunity
to think about how to better word your point in order to avoid
upsetting others in the future.

Why have these principles?

The goal isn't to burden SIPB with a bunch of annoying rules, nor to
give us a stick to bludgeon people with for "being bad", nor to
encourage "tattling".  Rather, these rules are designed to help all of
us build a pleasant, productive, and welcoming community.

What happens if someone violates these principles?

It is our hope that the entire community will strive to uphold these
principles.  If you feel that someone's behavior towards you violates
the letter or the spirit of these principles, it is our hope that this
document will make you feel empowered to raise this issue with that
person, and explain your feelings.  As always, however, if someone's
behavior or speech in the office is making you feel uncomfortable or
unwelcome, please contact a member of the EC.

If you, as a third party, observe someone else violating the letter or
spirit of these principles, you are encouraged to speak with the
person who is upset (if feel comfortable doing so) and discuss the
incident with them, and if they're still upset, encourage them to
reach out to the EC.  You should also feel empowered to speak to the
other party, if you feel comfortable doing so.  Finally, as always, if
someone's behavior or speech in the office is making you feel
uncomfortable or unwelcome, please contact a member of the EC.

Finally, if you yourself realize that you just violated these
principles, call yourself out on it publicly.  Doing so will help
convey that these issues are important to the community, and may help
empower others to speak up.  If someone else tells you that you
violated these principles, take a minute to reflect, and apologize to
the person, and move on.  It doesn't mean you're a "bad" person, or
even a "bad" SIPB member.  After all, SIPB should be a place where 
people can make mistakes and learn from them -- and that includes social
mistakes.  If you make an occasional social error, _but then learn from
it_, that's at least as useful as learning something technical.

[1] Licensed from Peter Iannucci, CC-BY-SA.
[2] The term "well-actually" was originally coined by Miguel de Icaza.