
A Code of Conduct for the Go community - sethvargo
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-nuts/sy-YcVPADjg/bcO6LAr29EIJ
======
jgrahamc
_I 'm also concerned by reports of abuse, harassment, and discrimination in
our community, particularly toward women and other underrepresented groups.
Even I have experienced harassment and abuse myself. This may be common in the
tech industry but it is not OK._

Not, it is not OK. And this entire post could have been written about other
languages and other communities. Glad that Andrew is saying this for Go.

It's amazing the abuse people dole out when they are online and behind a
keyboard. When I was running the Alan Turing apology campaign in 2009 I
received all sorts of hate in my inbox. I wasn't shocked by it because I've
been using the Internet since 1986, but I was saddened.

~~~
mmgutz
Are there any references to this abuse, harrassment and discrimination from
the Golang community? I haven't seen it in my year working with Go.

Seems like a pretty broad generalization.

~~~
enneff
If you're not subject to it then you won't notice it.

I have noticed because I've had it reported to me directly. I wasn't aware of
it before then.

Also it is not a "generalization". These are isolated incidents but they are
harmful to the people involved.

------
bsaul
I'm amazed that an online group whose focus is to talk about a programming
language thinks about adopting a code of conduct... I would have thought
trying to keep the discussions about the programming language itself would be
enough.

Is it some kind of american / californian extreme sensitivity to heated
debates or has there been a recent invasion of trolls i'm unaware of ?

~~~
scrollaway
Both. American culture has created an image of "harrassment and
discrimination" very specific to the US, so a lot of people tend to see it
where there is none, and be blind to actual instances of it (The hilarious/sad
debate on "discrimination" in the most recent Witcher game comes to mind. Feel
free to google it, I will not fuel that fire).

That said, online communities tend to very easily turn elitism into hostility,
and hostility into hatefulness. Incredibly toxic. I'm not sure how a code of
conduct helps - if you have to spell out to people that they shouldn't be
hateful, there's a bigger problem at stake, and the code of conduct is just
here to protect the community from wrongdoing, not hostile behaviour.

But hey, it can't actually hurt to have one, so why not. I hope it helps, the
cynic in me just doubts it will.

Edit: I see any post discussing the nature of the CoC and not blindly saying
"this is awesome! woohoo!" is getting downvoted quite heavily. That's pretty
sad, and a great way to encourage people never to speak against the majority
(in this case, there is a majority of americans on HN online at this hour).
Think about that, for a moment.

------
spotman
Agree that mis-conduct on the internet is always in poor taste, and also agree
that sometimes pointers can help people with some basic tips that make their
quest to give or receive help more palatable.

Having said that, I certainly hope that this does not become some sort of
thing that people spend a lot of time worrying about, enforcing, or baby
sitting others.

For example, the sheer fact that a CoC could exist for go, may mean that
people spend time policing rather than programming.

Until reading this I was not aware Rust had a CoC. Can anyone comment on the
process that was used to create this, and how its going? Is there recourse for
someone that is out of line? Is there human energy spent on policing this?

For me, programming languages shouldn't dictate CoC. However, I think it makes
a lot more sense for communities to. So where do you draw the line between
community and programming language? Obviously a programming language like C
has no central community really. However with Rust and Go and some others
there is main IRC channels and more. I just can't help but feel that the
forum, IRC network, etc, should be responsible for the CoC. I don't like that
Go could end up having a prescribed culture. Some of the most talented C
programmers I know are edgy, intolerable people. I would hate for some of
their work to get thrown out because they can't be relied on to have a sane
discussion 1/2 the time.

What can we really do as community to enforce it at the language level really?
I can see someone being banned from a forum. But, what if they don't stop
using Golang? Seems like something that is impossible to police.

~~~
enneff
The success of Go depends on a healthy community. I am quite happy to lose
some talented people if they can't play well with others.

~~~
spotman
What prevents someone like linus torvalds from being kicked out for cussing at
people? Would linux be where it is today? Those are the type of people I am
referring to. Not racist people, for example.

Now I understand that his issues are not the ones that are ultimately the goal
of fixing here. But where do you draw the line? And is is the programming
languages responsibility to police this?

Where is the CoC for C anyways:) ?

~~~
enneff
It's pretty hard to kick Linus out of his own project. That's how he does
things and that's what his contributors will apparently put up with. I guess
it works for him.

But I don't want to work with people who behave like Linus does (at his
worst), regardless of how good they are.

The people who do contribute to the Go core are very talented hackers who also
manage to treat each other with respect, so obviously it can be done.

~~~
spotman
Agreed on the hard to kick linus out of linux.

However, this is an interesting discussion. Linus (to my knowledge, please
feel free to post evidence otherwise) has not been racist or displayed
misogynistic behavior, has he?

So, here you have a very talented indivdual, who is very opinionated and uses
some coarse language at times.

While I could also go without the coarse language, he is often right (not
saying 100% of the time, but he has earned his reputation) and I would
absolutely hate if by adding a CoC you lose people like him.

So, the CoC could clearly articulate that linus-like behavior is ok, and
racism is not, it makes it hard to police. Especially when on this very
thread, you say you would rather not work with people like that, so then do we
add coarse language to the CoC too?

Thoughts?

~~~
tptacek
You should read the Django Code Of Conduct before venturing further into this
discussion, because what 'enneff is talking about isn't simply harassment.

What they're trying to do is set expectations about decorum and professional
courtesy; for instance, if you're on the mailing list or IRC channel and
someone asks a question with an "obvious" answer that has been covered 10
times before, how are community participants expected to respond to that?

Lots of communities without codes of conduct get testy, hostile, inhospitable,
snarky, or obstreperous when those kinds of things happen, and that makes the
community harder to engage with, especially for newcomers.

~~~
spotman
Thanks for your reply - I will read it. This is something that is interesting
to me, and I hope it doesn't come across as I am taking sides - but more
asking questions and expressing my first initial fears, given my experience
with some engineers who are 'rough around the edges' but are invaluable in
their experience.

For the record I am in no way saying I want the community of golang to put up
with this stuff. It should even be un-cool to use bad language, and of course
completely not-ok-at-all to be racist, or harass people, etc.

I certainly won't stop using go if there is a CoC. I simply hope that it
doesn't turn into a framework for people not having thick skin when an someone
who does not have a soft approach is giving out useful information.

If it is truly gotten so bad that we have to have that to also have a wider
effort of dealing with really bad stuff like racism or harassment then I guess
so be it. Maybe my head is in the sand, but I was curious what has happened
like this in the go community?

More my bigger question which no one has really commented on, but, why not
have this on the go-nuts forum as a CoC for the forum, and have it on the IRC
channels?

For example, HN has some guidelines, such as the don't be overly negative
thing and what not. So, can communities like email groups, irc, and sites like
HN not help our culture along enough?

Curious to hear people's objective thoughts on this. I did some quick
research. Django has a pretty elaborate CoC. Python is very brief, and leaves
a ton open to interpretation. Ruby on Rails doesn't appear to have one. Ruby
does not have one. C does not have one.

What communities has this been a problem in? I have heard of some in Python.
Just curious as this is a new issue to me, and being in this industry for 15
years, I have just gotten use to terse people, and have experienced very
little harassment or racism. I see articles lately dealing with misogyny, but
have yet to have to deal with that fortunately. Possibly, I am just lucky?

~~~
sanxiyn
> And being in this industry for 15 years, I have experienced very little
> harassment or racism. I see articles lately dealing with misogyny, but have
> yet to have to deal with that fortunately. Possibly, I am just lucky?

I think a moment of thought would be enough to conclude that yes, you are just
lucky.

~~~
spotman
Maybe it's because I do not use IRC hardly ever?

I have worked at 3 extremely well known technology companies, 3 start-ups, and
had dozens and dozens of consulting projects. I have managed teams between 3
and 40 people, co-ed teams, and have served all kinds of engineering roles. (I
simply say this, as I do get around quite a bit, not trying to say anything
other than that).

Sure I have seen the occasional issue both online and in real life. But they
don't seem specific to a programming language, it's usually one person out of
line and the immediate surrounding community (employer, or forum) handles.

Maybe this issue is not as wide-spread as people think? Would love to hear
reports of toxicity in the golang community specifically.

Or maybe people are in fear, and this is a preventative action?

~~~
coldtea
> _Maybe this issue is not as wide-spread as people think?_

People in general don't think it is. Anglosaxons do.

------
ternaryoperator
The problem with a Code of Conduct is that for it to have any meaning, it
needs to be enforced--someone has to kick out repeat offenders, otherwise the
code is just words. For this reason, having a code that reflects "what we
aspire to," rather than "don't do this," is laudable, but probably not
workable. At some point, I believe, you have to state consequences for
specific actions.

------
agonzalezro
Since the CoCs started to be a thing I always though that they were
unnecessary because I growth with the mantra: "do unto others as you would
have them do unto you".

Said that, sadly, this doesn't seem to be a true statement in tech and a CoC
doesn't hurt. I am ok with Go getting one if it's going to make people feel
more welcomed on the community.

~~~
coldtea
> _" do unto others as you would have them do unto you"._

So a masochist can hit other people?

I'm joking, but it shows a general issue with that motto: that what a person
finds acceptable might not be what others want in a project.

E.g. person X likes seeing cat pictures in HN, and wants other people to post
cat pictures. But that doesn't mean that X posting cat pictures would be what
the others want too.

~~~
WoodenChair
You're taking a literal reading out of something that's not meant to be
literal. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" means treat
other people with respect and be nice to them because most people like to be
respected and treated nicely. You're right it probably wasn't written 5000
years ago for the extreme case of a person who likes being treated badly.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule)

~~~
mentat
Or you could just take the less imposing version and not do to others what you
don't want done to yourself.

------
gregors
In other news people dealing with other people cause problems, see world
history for more details.

------
4ydx
As long as it is only about trying to get people to think about what they are
saying that seems ok, but I suspect it will only degrade into a pitchfork mob
on most occasions.

Really as others have suggested the only required "rule" is: talk about
programming.

------
leereeves
> _I 'm also concerned by reports of abuse, harassment, and discrimination in
> our community, particularly toward women and other underrepresented groups.
> Even I have experienced harassment and abuse myself. This may be common in
> the tech industry but it is not OK._

I find it hard to imagine other professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants,
even other engineering disciplines) behaving like this.

Is that a failure of imagination on my part or is IT/CS particularly toxic?

~~~
spikels
If you think there is no "abuse, harassment, and discrimination" in the
medical, legal, accounting and non-IT engineering professions, you are not
paying attention. These are global human problems not restricted to IT/CS.

~~~
leereeves
I didn't mean to imply that there is no "abuse, harassment, and
discrimination" in other professions. Of course there are bad people in every
field.

But are there death threats, rape threats, doxxing, etc, against total
strangers?

Serious question. I just haven't heard of that, except perhaps in the military
and police.

~~~
MaysonL
See, for example: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
abortion_violence#Murders](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
abortion_violence#Murders)

------
nnethercote
Good for them.

------
anon3_
I'm sad to see more political correctness invading these circles.

A few years ago, I was so happy to see a girl every now and then at our LUG.
Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.

After years of seeing censorship and lives ruined over off-hand comments, I
immediately see women instinctually view her as a risk.

Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations
when things don't go her way?

Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually
tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently
report me for revenge.

Institionalizing political correctness breeds biases and hatred. It's a
pressure cooker. You can't even criticize this stuff without being outed as a
heretic.

~~~
sanswork
It's not difficult to just treat people like normal humans.

>Me and the other guys were jumping over each other to help her.

This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all
you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing them.
Were you and the other guys jumping over each other to help every guy that
showed up? Why the women? Were you doing it because you were nice or because
it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?

>Is she a lawsuit? Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations
when things don't go her way?

You talk about fear of criticizing this stuff but almost everyone who lives
their lives in fear of a sexual discrimination lawsuit do so because they
regularly act inappropriately around others.

>Sure, the women may laugh at my jokes for a few months. But when I eventually
tell her no for a reason based on her shortcomings, she can conveniently
report me for revenge.

Sure the woman may put up with your actions for a few months but everyone has
a breaking point.

Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you
fear for your safety due to these traits. You're like a self fulfilling
prophecy. If you ever do end up involved in a lawsuit it likely won't be due
to women in general being sneaky or seeking revenge it will likely be due to
your belief that they act like that causing you to act negatively towards
them.

~~~
Rumford
> This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all
> you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing
> them.

Choosing to interpret clumsiness as "abuse" is EXACTLY the problem he's
describing. If "jumping over each other to help her" is inappropriate, then
someone needs to describe what _is_ appropriate when the group is trying to go
out of their way to welcome someone who isn't the group's usual demographic.
It is not OK to label everything they do as abusive without explaining what
your standard for good behavior would be.

> Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you
> hoped to get something in return?

And then you accuse _him_ of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see
the hypocrisy?

> Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you
> fear for your safety due to these traits.

Again, stupendously wrong. I think you're twisting his words this way on
purpose and it turns my stomach that people are getting away with this.

He's not complaining about "women" being "devious." He's complaining about the
poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte
blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows
what reason.

There is no question we should treat people with respect. But whether they
belong to some minority, or some supposedly aggrieved group, DOES NOT MATTER.
A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?

If there's a way you need other people to act in order for you to feel
comfortable, fine, you have every right to tell people what those boundaries
of yours are. At the same time though, your comfort zone does not
automatically obligate everyone around you to change.

~~~
sanswork
I'm explaining why it is seen as a negative. Treating that person the same as
anyone else is your group is what is appropriate.

>And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see
the hypocrisy?

I don't view all men with suspicion so no. I view men who act like he
described with suspicion though.

>He's not complaining about "women" being "devious."

"Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go
her way?"

That's actually exactly what he was doing.

>He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created
when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of
"Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.

No group has that ability though. What is happening is he's built up in his
mind this boogyman and is letting his fears of it control his actions in such
a way that he is actually making himself act in a negative way.

>A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?

Yes, and that is exactly what I said above. He was describing a situation
where him and his group were specifically not treating people equally and
being upset because his actions in differentiating a person from his group was
off putting.

>At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate
everyone around you to change.

The thing is though the community has decided on a set of rules for how people
should act to be a part of it. If you can't live by those conventions then
fine but you can't complain about being excluded from the community when you
don't.

If you find being asked to treat people civilly and equally to be a threat to
you then odds are you really need to reevaluate who you are as a person.

No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, everyone is an asshole at
different times or acts inappropriately. Being able to recognize that you are
in the wrong at those times instead of blaming society is a part of belonging
to it though.

~~~
Rumford
> Treating that person the same as anyone else is your group is what is
> appropriate.

Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would
lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't
roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."

The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech,
it's the people spreading this paranoia. It's the people telling women that
every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to
enter.

The reason stuff like this scares _me_ is not that I'm accustomed to acting
like a troll and don't want to stop. It's because I have spent decades
treating everyone I meet with respect, and I now feel I could be punished for
a crime I didn't commit at any moment. A good reputation takes a lifetime to
build, and in this environment it can be undermined in moments. Now that we
seem to be surrounded by people on high alert for signs of thoughtcrime, this
asset -- my reputation -- which I've spent a lifetime building is on very thin
ice just because my race and sex and politics and gender choices don't
intersect with any politically correct victim groups. I don't like it, and I'm
not going to just shrink back in fear and say nothing about it.

~~~
sanswork
>Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would
lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't
roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."

It's the beliefs like that which I am talking about. You've built up this
imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you
out. And that all women demand a red carpet rolled out for them or else they
will file a claim against you.

>The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech,
it's the people spreading this paranoia.

Right, like you who is spreading this fear that they have to constantly be on
their toes because the women are out to catch them making a mistake so they
can ruin your life.

>It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated
before the field is safe for her to enter.

The thing is it isn't every man that needs to be reeducated. Most of us are
perfectly fine interacting with any gender. But there is definitely a minority
that is a problem and changes to cultures are a problem for them because they
act inappropriately.

Your fear is imaginary if you act the way you claim. There is no boogyman out
to get you.

~~~
Rumford
> You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just
> waiting to catch you out.

You've really got to stop doing that. I've already explained this isn't about
women in particular. This is about a culture of guilty-until-proven-innocent
in cases where one is being charged with having thoughts or intentions that
offend the purveyors of grievance culture. A good example is this very
conversation. Your tactic here, over and over again, has been to try and put
me on the defensive, as if I have to prove I'm not a sexist.

Just stop it. This is a poisonous way to talk to people. You're only sowing
division.

------
coldtea
Is "you should, at every opportunity, declare how you can do useful work
without generics, and that people asking for them haven't done any real work
in Go" in there?

