Leo, One point that I'm definitely sure on is that we will need a larger team than what we have at the moment, especially as we were discussing needs for people to still be able to attend and function at a meeting. Brian Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 ________________________________ From: Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> Sent: Sunday 8 November 2020 19:21 To: Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> Cc: coc-tf@ripe.net <coc-tf@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [coc-tf] Python Community CoC & Procedures CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 8:22 AM Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.python...

I found this an impressive collection of documents. There's clearly been a lot of careful thought put into this code. I particularly like the "Our Community" section at the start, especially the first bullet about being open. The summary of process in the Python code goes from #4 (Evaluate the reported incident) to #5 (Propose a behavioral modification plan) and #6 (Propose consequences for the reported behavior). It is only at this point that there's an acknowledgement that a report could be in error. I think that for clarity of communication, we should make sure the process itself does not appear to pre-judge the outcome. The section on decision making is useful input to us in a couple of contexts. Firstly, they require a 2/3 majority in a vote of the Code of Conduct WG when deciding on behavioral modification plans and consequences for violation of the code. If we chose to adopt this model it would mean a significantly larger team than the current Trusted Contacts team, which was previously three members and is now two. This is because the vote needs to be possible if a member has a conflict of interest or is unavailable. Presumably, this means at least four people in the Code of Conduct team. Many thanks, Leo

Hi, On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 3:02 AM Salam Yamout <salamyamout@gmail.com> wrote:

What is clear to me after reading the Python Code of Conduct sent by Brian, and FIRST code of conduct sent by Myriam that our coc is a lot less clear and more complicated. I know we will be discussing this tomorrow during our meeting but I was just wondering out loud how much of a revamp we are getting ourselves in.

This is one of the reasons I placed a document structure on the draft agenda for our upcoming meeting. When I put this structure together I tried to remember everything we've discussed and to order it logically. But that has made for a hefty structure, so I'd like to spend some time working on where we should be cut, where we should be brief, and where we should be expansive. Thanks, Leo