General Resolution: code of conduct
- Time Line
- Proposer
- Seconds
- Text
- Amendment Proposer A
- Amendment Seconds A
- Amendment Text A
- Quorum
- Data and Statistics
- Majority Requirement
- Outcome
Time Line
Proposal and amendment | Wednesday, 12th February 2014 | |
---|---|---|
Discussion Period: | Monday, 10th March, 2014 | |
Voting Period: | Monday, April 14st, 00:00:00 UTC, 2014 | Sunday, April 27th, 23:59:59 UTC, 2014 |
Proposer
Wouter Verhelst [[email protected]] [text of proposal] [Accepting amendement] [Call for vote]
Seconds
- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio [[email protected]] [mail]
- Neil McGovern [[email protected]] [mail]
- Thijs Kinkhorst [[email protected]] [mail]
- Paul Tagliamonte [[email protected]] [mail]
- Ian Jackson [[email protected]] [mail]
- Sylvestre Ledru [[email protected]] [mail]
- Stuart Prescott [[email protected]] [mail]
- Lars Wirzenius [[email protected]] [mail]
Text
Choice 1: Accept CoC, DPL can update it
- The Debian project decides to accept a code of conduct for participants to its mailinglists, IRC channels, and other modes of communication within the project.
- Updates to this code of conduct should be made by the DPL or the DPL's delegates after consultation with the project, or by the Debian Developers as a whole through the general resolution procedure.
- The initial text of the code of conduct follows, in markdown format.
Amendment Proposer A
Neil McGovern [[email protected]] [Text of original amendements] [Accepting amendements] [confirm accepting amendements]
Amendment Seconds A
- Thijs Kinkhorst [[email protected]] [mail]
- Paul Tagliamonte [[email protected]] [mail]
- Sylvestre Ledru [[email protected]] [mail]
- Stuart Prescott [[email protected]] [mail]
- Lars Wirzenius [[email protected]] [mail]
Amendment Text A
Choice 2: Accept CoC, updates via GR
- The Debian project decides to accept a code of conduct for participants to its mailinglists, IRC channels, and other modes of communication within the project.
- Updates to this code of conduct should follow the normal GR procedure. However, the DPL (or the DPL's delegates) can add or remove links to other documents in the "Further reading" section after consultation with the project and without requiring a GR.
- The initial text of the code of conduct follows, in markdown format.
Initial text of the code of conduct
# Debian Code of Conduct ## Be respectful In a project the size of Debian, inevitably there will be people with whom you may disagree, or find it difficult to cooperate. Accept that, but even so, remain respectful. Disagreement is no excuse for poor behaviour or personal attacks, and a community in which people feel threatened is not a healthy community. ## Assume good faith Debian Contributors have many ways of reaching our common goal of a [free](https://iwawocd.cewmufwd.tk/intro/free) operating system which may differ from your ways. Assume that other people are working towards this goal. Note that many of our Contributors are not native English speakers or may have different cultural backgrounds ## Be collaborative Debian is a large and complex project; there is always more to learn within Debian. It's good to ask for help when you need it. Similarly, offers for help should be seen in the context of our shared goal of improving Debian. When you make something for the benefit of the project, be willing to explain to others how it works, so that they can build on your work to make it even better. ## Try to 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. When a long explanation is necessary, consider adding a summary. Try to bring new arguments 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. ## Be open Most ways of communication used within Debian allow for public and private communication. As per paragraph three of the [social contract](https://iwawocd.cewmufwd.tk/social_contract), you should preferably use public methods of communication for Debian-related messages, unless posting something sensitive. This applies to messages for help or Debian-related support, too; not only is a public support request much more likely to result in an answer to your question, it also makes sure that any inadvertent mistakes made by people answering your question will be more easily detected and corrected. ## In case of problems While this code of conduct should be adhered to by participants, we recognize that sometimes people may have a bad day, or be unaware of some of the guidelines in this code of conduct. When that happens, you may reply to them and point out this code of conduct. Such messages may be in public or in private, whatever is most appropriate. However, regardless of whether the message is public or not, it should still adhere to the relevant parts of this code of conduct; in particular, it should not be abusive or disrespectful. 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. Serious or persistent offenders will be temporarily or permanently banned from communicating through Debian's systems. Complaints should be made (in private) to the administrators of the Debian communication forum in question. To find contact information for these administrators, please see [the page on Debian's organizational structure](https://iwawocd.cewmufwd.tk/intro/organization) # Further reading Some of the links in this section do not refer to documents that are part of this code of conduct, nor are they authoritative within Debian. However, they all do contain useful information on how to conduct oneself on our communication channels. - Debian has a [diversity statement](https://iwawocd.cewmufwd.tk/intro/diversity) - The [Debian Community Guidelines](https://people.debian.org/~enrico/dcg/) by Enrico Zini contain some advice on how to communicate effectively. - The [Mailing list code of conduct](https://iwawocd.cewmufwd.tk/MailingLists/#codeofconduct) is useful for advice specific to Debian mailing lists
Quorum
With the current list of voting developers, we have:
Current Developer Count = 1002 Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.8271917913444 K min(5, Q ) = 5 Quorum (3 x Q ) = 47.4815753740332
Quorum
- Option1 Reached quorum: 205 > 47.4815753740332
- Option2 Reached quorum: 228 > 47.4815753740332
Data and Statistics
For this GR, like always, statistics will be gathered about ballots received and acknowledgements sent periodically during the voting period. Additionally, the list of voters will be recorded. Also, the tally sheet will also be made available to be viewed. Additionally, the list of voters will be recorded. Also, the tally sheet will also be made available to be viewed.
Majority Requirement
The proposal needs simple majority
Majority
- Option1 passes Majority. 2.847 (205/72) >= 1
- Option2 passes Majority. 4.302 (228/53) >= 1
Outcome
In the graph above, any pink colored nodes imply that the option did not pass majority, the Blue is the winner. The Octagon is used for the options that did not beat the default.
- Option 1 "Accept CoC, DPL can update it"
- Option 2 "Accept CoC, updates via GR"
- Option 3 "Further Discussion"
In the following table, tally[row x][col y] represents the votes that option x received over option y. A more detailed explanation of the beat matrix may help in understanding the table. For understanding the Condorcet method, the Wikipedia entry is fairly informative.
Option | |||
---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | |
Option 1 | 128 | 205 | |
Option 2 | 141 | 228 | |
Option 3 | 72 | 53 |
Looking at row 2, column 1, Accept CoC, updates via GR
received 141 votes over Accept CoC, DPL can update it
Looking at row 1, column 2, Accept CoC, DPL can update it
received 128 votes over Accept CoC, updates via GR.
Pair-wise defeats
- Option 2 defeats Option 1 by ( 141 - 128) = 13 votes.
- Option 1 defeats Option 3 by ( 205 - 72) = 133 votes.
- Option 2 defeats Option 3 by ( 228 - 53) = 175 votes.
The Schwartz Set contains
- Option 2 "Accept CoC, updates via GR"
The winners
- Option 2 "Accept CoC, updates via GR"
Debian uses the Condorcet method for voting.
Simplistically, plain Condorcets method
can be stated like so :
Consider all possible two-way races between candidates.
The Condorcet winner, if there is one, is the one
candidate who can beat each other candidate in a two-way
race with that candidate.
The problem is that in complex elections, there may well
be a circular relationship in which A beats B, B beats C,
and C beats A. Most of the variations on Condorcet use
various means of resolving the tie. See
Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping
for details. Debian's variation is spelled out in the
constitution,
specifically, A.6.
Debian Project Secretary