Code Of Conduct

From OSGeo
Revision as of 15:52, 16 October 2015 by Wiki-Camerons (talk | contribs) (→‎Classification)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please refer to the official version of this wiki page at: .

This page includes reference to prior material and comments applied during the development. (For history, refer to the Diversity page). The official version 1.0 of the Code of Conduct was taken from:

OSGeo Code of Conduct

Version: 1.0

Date: May 2015


This code of conduct governs how we behave in any OSGeo forum or event and whenever we will be judged by our actions. We expect it to be honored by everyone who participates in the OSGeo community formally or informally, or claims any affiliation with the OSGeo Foundation.

It applies to in-person events (such as conferences and related social events), IRC, public and private mailing lists, the issue tracker, the wiki, blogs, Twitter, and any other forums which the community uses for communication and interactions.

This code is not exhaustive or complete. It serves to distill our common understanding of a collaborative, shared environment and goals. We expect it to be followed in spirit as much as in the letter, so that it can enrich all of us and the technical communities in which we participate.

Diversity Statement

OSGeo welcomes and encourages participation by everyone. We are committed to being a community that everyone feels good about joining, and we will always work to treat everyone well. No matter how you identify yourself or how others perceive you: we welcome you.

Specific Guidelines

We strive to:

Be open.
We invite anyone to participate in our community. We preferably use public methods of communication for project-related messages, unless discussing something sensitive. This applies to messages for help or project-related support, too; not only is a public support request much more likely to result in an answer to a question, it also makes sure that any inadvertent mistakes made by people answering will be more easily detected and corrected.
Be empathetic, welcoming, friendly, and patient.
We work together to resolve conflict, assume good intentions, and do our best to act in an empathetic fashion. We may all experience some frustration from time to time, but we do not allow frustration to turn into a personal attack. A community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one. Note that we have a multi-cultural, multi-lingual community and some of us are non-native speakers. We should be respectful when dealing with other community members as well as with people outside our community.
Be collaborative.
Our work will be used by other people, and in turn we will depend on the work of others. When we make something for the benefit of OSGeo, we are willing to explain to others how it works, so that they can build on the work to make it even better. Any decision we make will affect users and colleagues, and we take those consequences seriously when making decisions.
Be inquisitive.
Nobody knows everything! Asking questions early avoids many problems later, so questions are encouraged, though they may be directed to the appropriate forum. Those who are asked should be responsive and helpful, within the context of our shared goal of improving OSGeo.
Be careful in the words that we choose.
Whether we are participating as professionals or volunteers, we value professionalism in all interactions, and take responsibility for our own speech. Be kind to others. Do not insult or put down other participants.
Be concise.
Keep in mind that what you write once will be read by hundreds of persons. Writing a short email means people can understand the conversation as efficiently as possible. Short emails should always strive to be empathetic, welcoming, friendly and patient. When a long explanation is necessary, consider adding a summary.
Try to bring new ideas to a conversation so that each mail adds something unique to the thread, keeping in mind that the rest of the thread still contains the other messages with arguments that have already been made.
Try to stay on topic, especially in discussions that are already fairly large.
Step down considerately.
Members of every project come and go. When somebody leaves or disengages from the project they should tell people they are leaving and take the proper steps to ensure that others can pick up where they left off. In doing so, they should remain respectful of those who continue to participate in the project and should not misrepresent the project's goals or achievements. Likewise, community members should respect any individual's choice to leave the project.


Harassment and other exclusionary behaviour are not acceptable. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • Personal insults or discriminatory jokes and language, especially those using racist or sexist terms.
  • Offensive comments, excessive or unnecessary profanity.
  • Intimidation, violent threats or demands.
  • Sustained disruption of sessions or events.
  • Stalking, harassing photography or recording.
  • Unwelcome physical contact or sexual attention.
  • Repeated harassment of others. In general, if someone asks you to stop, then stop.
  • Posting (or threatening to post) other people's personally identifying information ("doxing").
  • Sharing private content, such as emails sent privately or non-publicly, or unlogged forums such as IRC channel history.
  • Advocating for, or encouraging, any of the above behaviour.

Classification Context

This additional section proposed for version 2.0:

As guidance, content should align with a film classification of: 12+ or PG or similar. There are many country classifications. To remove ambiguity, we refer to the Australian PG Classification:

  • Parental Guidance (PG) – Not recommended for viewing or playing by people under 15 without guidance from parents or guardians. Contains material that young viewers may find confusing or upsetting. The content is mild in impact.
    • Violence should be mild and infrequent, and should be presented in "a stylised or theatrical fashion, or in an historical context".
    • Themes should have a "mild sense of menace or threat" and be "discreet"
    • Frightening or Intense Scenes should be "mildly frightening" and have "low intensity"
    • Crude Humor should be "mild" or "low level"
    • Sex, nudity and drug use should be mild, infrequent, "discreetly implied" and "justified by context".
    • Coarse language should be mild and infrequent, and be justified by context.

Reporting Guidelines

If you believe someone is breaking this code of conduct, you may reply to them, and point to this code of conduct. Such messages may be in public or in private, whatever is most appropriate. Assume good faith; it is more likely that participants are unaware of their bad behaviour than that they intentionally try to degrade the quality of the discussion. Should there be difficulties in dealing with the situation, you may report your concerns to event staff, a forum leader or the OSGeo Board. Serious or persistent offenders may be expelled from the event or forum by event organizers or forum leaders.


All OSGeo projects and events should reference this Code of Conduct using text similar to:

Participants at <event> are expected to act respectfully toward others in accordance with the OSGeo Code of Conduct.


Contributors to <project> are expected to act respectfully toward others in accordance with the OSGeo Code of Conduct.

<End of the OSGeo Code of Conduct>

Goals for Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement

This list has been generated to help authors of this document to agree on what we aim to achieve from this Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement. It should:

  • Be applicable for: In person events such as CONFERENCES, code sprints, and related social events; as well as VIRTUAL FORUMS, such as email, IRC, wikis, etc.
  • Recognise that OSGeo has a DIVERSE community. (From Draft OSGeo Diversity Statement, and others)
  • Set expectation that people should act RESPECTFULLY toward each other. It is ok to respectfully disagree with people's technical ideas without attacking them personally. (From Draft OSGeo Diversity Statement, and others)
  • Make it clear that we don't condone HARASSMENT or offensive behaviour, and make it clear what that is. (From O'Reilly Code of Conduct and GeekGirls Anti-Harrassment Policy)
  • Outline a process for IDENTIFYING, REPORTING and ADDRESSING incidents which can be referenced by those dealing with incidents. Dealing with incidents is often a hostile situation, and having a process to reference can greatly help the people doing the hard job of mediating. (Derived from Tweaking the Moral UI)
  • Provide a framework for assessing what constitutes a violation of the Code-of-Conduct. After version 1 of the CoC was released, there was extensive debate in the OSGeo community as to whether a slide with female models, and a Salvador Dali painting (which contained a nude woman) constituted a violation of the CoC.
  • Identify the ROLE of the person, or group of people responsible for ensuring the process will be followed.
  • Include an escalation process for dealing with both minor and major issues. (From Draft OSGeo Conference Committee Code of Conduct)
  • Couch in positive, non-threatening language. (See QGIS Diversity Statement and Code of Conduct)
  • Recognise that not all participants will be native (English?) speakers and native speakers should adjust language chosen to make it easier for all participants to contribute. Eg: Try to avoid using slang. (From OGC Principles of Conduct)
  • Be concise. Concise words get read more. (See QGIS Diversity Statement)

Exemplar Sources

The OSGeo Code of Conduct is derived from numerous prior examples. On reading the prior material, you can see how the documents have been improving over time.

OGC Principles of Conduct

Derived from , Vintage: 2001
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Recognises the need to be inclusive, by making allowances for people who are not speaking in their native language.
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Encourages people to debate and potentially disagree on ideas, without attacking people personally.
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Too verbose.

Geek Feminism Template Anti Harassment Policy

  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Provides customisable version.
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Provides short/medium/long version
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Contains internal guidance for conference staff on how to handle harassment reports
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Focuses only on sexual harassment, doesn't cover other topics such non-native speakers, be respectful (in general, to all).
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Language of some later CoC statements are less confrontational

FOSS4G 2015 NA and FOSS4G 2015 Code of Conduct

Source, downloaded 24 March 2015, derived from others, like: and
Similar Source
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Starts with a tick-box version which can be used during registration of an event.
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Language has interpreted by some as confrontational, and could be interpreted as implying assumption of guilt.
  • CON: (cameronshorter) It would be better if this statement could be made shorter.

O'Reilly Code of Conduct

Source, downloaded 24 March 2015
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) It makes good use of positive language
  • CON: (cameronshorter) This is missing a description of graduated escalation process, and how a report would be handled.
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Focuses on conference venues. Later documents cover on-line communication better.

QGIS Diversity Statement

Second Source
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) States acceptance of diversity without singling out all the possible variants of diversity (race, religion, gender, ...)
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Concise.
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Doesn't cover other Code of Conduct items, such as what is/is not acceptable.

QGIS Code of Conduct

Derived from
Django Code of Conduct and Speak Up Code of Conduct.
Based on SpeakUp CoC and
  • PRO: (cameronshorter) Written in positive language
  • CON: (cameronshorter) Too verbose

Debian diversity statement

April 2014

Debian Code of Conduct

April 2014
  • PRO: (johanvdw) I added these Debian references because I like the style which is used in the code of conduct for Debian: short bold bullet point with some more information afterwards (like the qgis version).;
  • PRO (johanvdw) I also think the second item "assume good faith" is a very important one, which is missing from the current proposal.
  • PRO (cameronshorter) I like the "try to be concise" - which is a form of respect to others.
  • PRO (cameronshorter) This contains a graduated escalation process providing guidance on dealing with both minor and major issues.
  • PRO (cameronshorter) This contains a version number, such which can be referenced as a point in time, and such that we can identify when to upgrade to a newer version of a Code Of Conduct.
  • CON (cameronshorter) This focuses on online communications and doesn't address issues at face-to-face events as well.

Apache Code of Conduct

Source, retrieved April 2015

Apache contains a separate Anti Harassment Policy, derived from the Geek Feminism Anti Harassment Policy.

December 2014
  • PRO: This addresses a few more use cases not covered by Debian, such as Don't share private emails in a public forum.
  • CON: This CoC is missing a version number, such that is can be referenced by version.
  • CON: States that English is the primary language - OSGeo has forums in other languages.
  • CON: In places, text repeats itself (in particular, under the "Reporting Guidelines" section).

Hackers on Planate Earth (HOPE) Code of Conduct

  • PRO: Adds an element of humour, while still covering core topics: "Everyone is welcome at HOPE events, regardless of ... text editor choice... In short: HOPE is a space for tolerance and respect."

Draft OSGeo Board Diversity Statement

Original Briefer Source

Draft OSGeo Conference Committee Code of Conduct

Source, 16 January 2015

Further References

PROPOSED Code of Conduct Committee - Meeting Notes, Proposal, and Resources