xeps/xep-0458.xml

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE xep SYSTEM 'xep.dtd' [
	<!ENTITY % ents SYSTEM 'xep.ent'>
%ents;
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='xep.xsl'?>
<xep>
	<header>
		<title>Community Code of Conduct</title>
		<abstract>
			This document describes the XMPP Standard Foundation's Code of Conduct.
		</abstract>
		&LEGALNOTICE;
		<number>0458</number>
		<status>Active</status>
		<type>Procedural</type>
		<sig>None</sig>
		<approver>Board</approver>
		<dependencies/>
		<supersedes/>
		<supersededby/>
		<shortname>N/A</shortname>
		&dcridland;
		&stpeter;
  <revision>
    <version>1.0.0</version>
    <date>2024-01-15</date>
    <initials>psa</initials>
    <remark><p>Changed status to Active per Board vote on 2024-01-05.</p></remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.4.0</version>
    <date>2023-12-11</date>
    <initials>psa</initials>
    <remark><p>Address Last Call feedback; complete a copy edit and apply clarifications in several places.</p></remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.3.0</version>
    <date>2023-09-14</date>
    <initials>psa</initials>
    <remark><p>Address substantive feedback from JC Brand; add Peter Saint-Andre as co-author to help address future feedback.</p></remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.2.1</version>
    <date>2023-07-12</date>
    <initials>egp</initials>
    <remark><p>Add anchors to every section, for easier linking.  Also fix a typo.</p></remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.2.0</version>
    <date>2021-06-29</date>
    <initials>dwd</initials>
    <remark>Integrate various comments from various sources</remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.1.0</version>
    <date>2021-06-10</date>
    <initials>XEP Editor (jsc)</initials>
    <remark>Accept as Experimental after unanimous approval by Board of the ProtoXEP draft for discussion within the community.</remark>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <version>0.0.1</version>
    <date>2021-06-01</date>
    <initials>dwd</initials>
    <remark>And so it began.</remark>
  </revision>
	</header>
	<section1 topic='Introduction' anchor='intro'>
		<p>The XMPP Standards Foundation provides a number of venues, both physical and virtual, for discussion
			and community activity. These include email lists, chatrooms, in-person Summits, and so on. It also
			produces much output designed for the general public, such as the XEPs themselves, the website,
			and kiosks or stands at actual events. Collectively, these are the XMPP Standards Foundation
			Activities.</p>
		<p>The Members of the Foundation, and the wider community of participants in the XSF Activities, are
			diverse in viewpoints and goals. We see this as a benefit - we wish the maximize the
			applicability and quality of our protocols, and therefore we wish to maximize the pool of
			potential participants who might offer their unique viewpoints and help us achieve our goals.</p>
		<p>It makes sense that there is a Code of Conduct that applies to the behaviour we expect both of
			ourselves and any other community members when participating in XSF Activities, especially for the sake of that public output.</p>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='The Code of Conduct' anchor='conduct'>
			<section2 topic="Welcome" anchor='welcome'>
				<p>You are welcome at XSF Activities. Ensure that you are also welcoming of others. We want
				everyone to feel welcome no matter what the colour of their skin, where they live,
				or where their ancestors came from. We want to welcome people from all
				cultures, and religions, and of all sizes and shapes. We want people to be welcome no
				matter their sexual identity or orientation. We want you to feel welcome no matter your
				level of experience or ability. And we want you to help us make everyone else feel
				welcomed, too.</p>
			</section2>
		<section2 topic="Assume Good Faith" anchor='assume-good-faith'>
			<p>We are a diverse community, working often to multiple goals. We
				assume the best intent from each other, and do not ascribe malice to others. Assume that if
				someone is complaining about your conduct, it is because they either genuinely feel it
				is exclusionary to them, or they genuinely believe it is exclusionary to others - 
				simply take it as a learning experience, correct your conduct and move on. If
				possible, assume, too, that bad conduct from others may derive from a misunderstanding
				or a lack of that learning experience rather than a deliberate attempt to exclude - 
				simply correct them and move on. Do not, however, use this as an excuse for
				your own bad conduct or a reason to ignore bad conduct by others.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Pick Your Words" anchor='pick-your-words'>
			<p>A small amount of effort in ensuring your words are
				professional and polite, and avoiding subjects and expressions that may offend, goes a
				long way. If you're unsure, it's often useful to limit your comments to the point you wish to make.</p>
                        <p>Additionally, because participants in XSF events and venues typically do not all share a common native language or culture, take extra care to ensure that your words can be understood clearly and without offense.</p>
                        <p>Attempting to say something humourous does not excuse a poor choice of words. It is very easy for humourous statements to miss the mark.</p>
			<p>Examples of what to avoid:</p>
				<ul>
					<li>Racist language, whether intentional or not.</li>
					<li>Threats of violence, or violent language directed against someone else.</li>
					<li>Sexually explicit imagery, language, or behaviour.</li>
				</ul>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Be Respectful" anchor='be-respectful'>
				<p>Disagreements are normal and common. Sometimes, there are conflicts or tensions among the different goals we
				have in our shared endeavour, and it is important that we are able to explain
				why. Criticism is essential to find the best solutions to the problems that face us.
				However, it is vital that while we are open and honest in our criticism, we do so with
				the calm respect we expect of others and with tolerance for other points of view.</p>
			<ul>
				<li>Try to be open regarding your point of view, intents and
				interests when expressing critique: this helps to discuss the different
					points of view in a constructive way.</li>
				<li>Try phrasing comments as an invitation to explore an issue.</li>
			</ul>
			<p>Examples of what to avoid:</p>
			<ul>
				<li>Personal insults.</li>
				<li>Ad-hominem attacks.</li>
			</ul>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Be Friendly and Supportive" anchor='be-friendly-and-supportive'>
			<p>We are, fundamentally, a community of people working to
				share technology with each other. We should be friendly toward each
				other, and act to support each other's efforts.</p>
			<p>Examples of what to avoid:</p>
			<ul>
				<li>Impersonation of other people (copying their nickname, avatar, and so on).</li>
				<li>Privacy breaches, including doxxing etc.</li>
				<li>Unwelcome sexual attention.</li>
				<li>Encouraging poor behaviour in others.</li>
				<li>Harassing others.</li>
			</ul>
			<p>As a rule of thumb, if you find yourself dividing the community into an
				"us" and a "them", you are risking breaking this Code of Conduct.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="About the Examples" anchor='about-the-examples'>
			<p>The examples in this document of "what not to do" are intended to be just that - examples.
				They are not intended to be exhaustive.</p>
			<p>Many of the terms used in these examples have formal definitions,
				either in law or elsewhere. In general, the strict interpretation of such a formal definition
				is not a strong basis for the acceptability of a certain behaviour. 
				Instead, please try to follow the spirit of this document, perhaps more so than its letter.</p>
		</section2>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic="Governing Principles" anchor='governing-principles'>
		<p>The governing principle of this Code of Conduct is that all participation in XSF Activities is
			solely by permission of the XMPP Standards Foundation. No person has any <em>automatic</em> right to join
			a XSF chatroom or mailing list, or contribute to XSF documents such as the XEP series.</p>
		<p>Naturally, under normal circumstances, the XMPP Standards Foundation welcomes and encourages
			participation in XSF Activities. Nevertheless, the XSF does reserve the right to partially or
			completely exclude anyone from any Activity, for any reason.</p>
		<p>The final decision on such exclusions is made by the Board, who may from time to time appoint a Work
			Team, called the Conduct Team, to act on their behalf. If the Work Team has not been appointed,
			the Conduct Team is the Board.</p>
		<p>There are exceptions to this - in particular, any right of elected members of the
			Foundation under the Bylaws cannot be curtailed by the Board, though the Board
			(or any other any member) could start the process to eject a member. This means
			that members are trusted by the other members to a higher degree than other
			participants; something that should be considered during elections.</p>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='Who This Applies To' anchor='who'>
		<p>This Code of Conduct applies to anyone who:</p>
		<ul>
			<li>Acts in a capacity which could reasonably be expected to be acting on behalf of the
				XMPP Standards Foundation or the wider XMPP Community.</li>
			<li>Participates in any XSF Activity.</li>
		</ul>
		<section2 topic="Acting in a Capacity" anchor='acting-in-capacity'>
			<p>Although on the face of it the first case may seem to be extremely broad, in fact the proviso of "reasonable expectation" ensures that this Code of Conduct will not be applied more often than necessary. The intent here is that while good behaviour which
				might be associated with the XSF and its community reflects well on us, the opposite is
				also true. By explicitly stating that this Code of Conduct applies when someone acts on behalf of the XSF, the XSF may
				sanction bad behaviour outside of XSF Activities should the need arise.</p>
			<p>Note also that this is not intended to mean that any XMPP developer's behaviour will be
				scrutinised constantly - using, for example, racist language in a talk about your XMPP
				project would be problematic, but using sexualised language in your erotic fiction
				hobby is unlikely to be relevant to this Code of Conduct.</p>
			<p>However, higher standards may be applied to those seen as representative of the community,
				such as XSF Members and, in particular, members of the Board or Council.</p>
		</section2>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='How We Handle Bad Conduct' anchor='enforcement'>
		<section2 topic="Reporting" anchor='reporting'>
			<p>If you witness bad conduct by somebody - that is, if you feel someone's behaviour does not
				live up to this Code of Conduct - please do express your concern (calmly and gently) to that
				person at the time, but only if you feel comfortable and competent to do so. This allows the person to recognise that their behaviour
				may be problematic and to correct it at the time without undue escalation. However, if you feel uncomfortable
				expressing your concern, that is perfectly fine and it will not affect further handling of the incident.</p>
			<p>Whether or not you expressed your concern at the time of the incident, you are encouraged to do one of the following:</p>
			<ul>
				<li>Let the Conduct Team know.</li>
				<li>Let the Board know.</li>
				<li>Let at least one member of the Board, and preferably more, know.</li>
			</ul>
			<p>Who you report it might depend on who was involved in the incident - you
				may feel that members of the Conduct Team or the Board were involved or present and therefore wish
				to report the incident to people who were not involved.</p>
			<p>In some cases, people may prefer to report an incident informally; while
				reporting "properly" is preferred, if possible the Conduct Team should strive to handle
				informal reports in the same way as formal reports, while at the same time not encouraging unverifiable reports such as gossip or hearsay.</p>
			<p>Importantly, even if someone else expressed concern or said to you that they would report an incident, please report
				it anyway. This helps to ensure that the Conduct Team have a clear understanding of what happened and who
				saw the conduct, and allows the Conduct Team to identify any longer term patterns.</p>
			<p>When you report the incident, include the place, date and time, and report it as calmly as
				possible.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Consideration" anchor='consideration'>
			<p>The Conduct Team will then discuss the incident. This should be done quickly, and in private.</p>
			<p>The Conduct Team may ask for further information from the person reporting the incident, the person or persons directly affected, the person accused of bad conduct,
				or others who were present.</p>
			<p>Finally, the Conduct Team will make a decision on whether sanctions or other actions should be taken, and determine the exact form of such sanctions or actions.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Sanctions and Actions" anchor='sanctions-and-actions'>
			<p>The purpose of a Code of Conduct is to ensure that our community is as
				welcoming and inclusive as possible. Sanctions are by their nature exclusionary,
				and many Actions are unlikely be to welcoming to those involved. Therefore the
				Conduct Team must consider how to ensure the Actions they take and the
				Sanctions they impose resolve the concerns proportionally, balancing the
				needs of the community with the individuals that form it, always keeping in mind the goal of
				maximizing inclusion and promoting positive behaviours.</p>
			<p>The Conduct team will normally have its authority to make decisions delegated to it
				by the Board. In some cases the Conduct Team may choose to hand its recommendation on
				Sanctions or other Actions to the Board even if authority has not been delegated. The Board
				will discuss and vote on these "in camera" (i.e., not in public and not minuted).</p>
			<p>Finally, the result will normally be explained to the person accused of bad conduct, and may
				be explained to the complainant.</p>
			<p>Any announcement of Actions or Sanctions is an Action in and of itself, and should be considered
				carefully. In general terms, any announcement should be proportionate to the bad conduct and the size of
				the audience which witnessed it. In high profile cases, therefore, the Conduct Team may decide
				the result will be announced publicly in order to restore trust.</p>
			<p>Sanctions may consist of having the ability to participate reduced or removed from some or
				all XSF Activities. Actions may include discussion with the Conduct Team. These are 
				only examples and are non-exhaustive.</p>
			<p>Many minor incidents will, therefore, not be reported publicly at all, and - even if there is
				an agreement that bad conduct occurred - may not result in any visible Actions at all.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Appeal" anchor='appeal'>
			<p>If you disagree with the decision made by the Conduct Team or the Board and you were either the person affected by bad
				conduct or the person subject to the Actions or Sanctions, you may appeal in writing by sending an
				email to the Board (or to the Board via a particular member). The Board will consider your argument as written and will normally
				respond. The Board's decision after appeal is, however, final.</p>
		</section2>
		<section2 topic="Situations Requiring Immediate Action" anchor='immediate'>
                <p>The foregoing process assumes that there is time for reporting, consideration, and well-reasoned decision-making "in a quiet hour". However, two very different kinds of situation might require immediate action:</p>
                <ol>
                <li>Clearly offensive, threatening, or disruptive but somewhat minor behaviour, for example "drive-by" comments in online chatrooms.</li>
                <li>Behaviour that poses a clear and present threat of physical harm, for example a fist-fight at an in-person event.</li>
                </ol>
                <p>In both kinds of situation, venue moderators are empowered to use their best judgment and take immediate action (in the first example, moderators might ban the sender from a chatroom; in the second example, moderators might break up a fight or call building security). However, the actions of venue moderators are always subject to appeal.</p>
		</section2>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='Security Considerations' anchor='security'>
		<p>It is possible for almost any behaviour to seem justified - there could be an argument that the behaviour is not, in fact, exclusionary,
			and that someone someone took offence too easily. It also is possible for the Code of Conduct
			to be weaponised for exclusionary purposes, by using the complaints mechanism to stall or
			silence valid debate. Both of these are cases where the very existence of a Code of Conduct could be
			used for exclusionary purposes, perverting its very intent. Obviously, don't do either.</p>
		<p>In particular, the principle "Assume Good Faith" opens the possibility of an endless argument over how much good faith
			to assume, and where the burden of proof lies - the phrasing in Section 2.2. is intended to minimize ambiguity
			in this regard, but cannot eliminate it entirely.</p>
		<p>There are no simple answers to these concerns. Future Boards and Conduct teams are advised to be
			wary of both cases.</p>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='IANA Considerations' anchor='iana'>
		<p>This document has no considerations for IANA.</p>
	</section1>
	<section1 topic='XMPP Registrar Considerations' anchor='registrar'>
		<p>This document has no considerations for the XMPP Registrar.</p>
	</section1>
        <section1 topic='Acknowledgements' anchor='ack'>
		<p>Thanks to JC Brand and Guus der Kinderen for their constructive feedback.</p>
        </section1>
</xep>