[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC][ALT PATCHES] Code of Conduct Enforcement

[James Almer]

On 5/14/2018 1:50 PM, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> Hello all.
> 
> This is a little rambling / stream of thought, but take it as you will,
> and perhaps some discussion or change comes of it. Or, more likely, personal
> attacks, flames, and no change. Or 1 few will reply and then the thread will
> die and people will go on like it never happened. Sorry to be pessimistic,
> but history speaks for itself.
> 
> Currently this list, and IRC, is a terrible place for developers and users.
> Harassment is tolerated, and the CoC has never been enforced. There are
> absolutely no repercussions as it currently stands. When develpers see others
> being abused, do nothing and then continue to act and interact with the
> abuses as if nothing happened, in the future.

As it currently stands, the only way to enforce the CoC is with a vote,
from a committee made from a list of ~20 devs about three or so years
ago who may or may not still be active, and who may or may not even know
enough about what is being voted.
Said committee was good for a few technical decisions back in the day,
but as soon as you introduce a vote related to developer conduct, all
the flaws become evident. Hell, even an IRC meeting was called once, but
then nobody wanted to touch the subject with a ten foot pole in it.

> 
> This current set up of everybody flaming each other endlessly, and endless
> harassment merely lets abuse proliferate, because nobody sticks up for each
> other and no abusers have ever been removed, ever, in the history of FFmpeg.
> Not one thing has changed, ever, since the introduction of the CoC. It is
> an absolute failure by all metrics.
> 
> I know I am not alone having been driven away by such behavior. Even when
> I started to contribute (a little, not much) again, upon joining IRC, for
> example, I was immediately attacked. This is not just happening to one
> person though.

I suppose you're talking about some months ago when you joined and iive
said something like "oh, he's back" or some such. I personally think you
overreacted in that situation, but i also find it odd you haven't muted
someone you have never liked to deal with, seeing plenty other devs do it.

> 
> To be honest, I am not really sure what can be done. Large portions of
> the list simply do not support anti-abuse measures at all. Even the
> concept of them. How does one manage to implement them without support
> of even 50% of a community? VideoLAN managed to do this but it took a lot
> of formal stuff on their board and people quitting to get it done. j-b
> is some sort of wizard.
> 
> I know my opinion is not worth much, since I am now more or less an outsider
> since 2015, but maybe someone cares about this stuff, too.
> 
> So, I present to you two possible options:
> 
>     1. Implement a formal CoC enforcement system. This has been mostly copypasted
>        from VideoLAN's, and is meant as more of a blueprint. This will no doubt
>        be controversial.
>     2. Remove the CoC. If you're not going to enforce it, ever, there is literally
>        no point in having one. I know some members of this community object to the
>        very notion of a CoC, so this should please them, I am sure.
> 
> I'm sure this will be a civil discussion.
> 
> - Derek
>