* add the content needed to cover online situations and report them online
* change the conference organizers by an equivalent body users can report
to (the committee)
* add possible actions to be taken against violators in an online context
then we end up basically with the draft we are writing. Rachel Farrand (and
therefore the Engineering Community team) is the main responsible of
assuring and enforcing the Friendly Space Policy, and for this reason I
have been checking that policy against this CoC all along. The Friendly
Space Policy is based on
unsurprisingly it shares a lot of DNA with the Contributor Covenant that
our CoC is based upon.
Therefore, I think that "reusing the Friendly space policy" to cover online
spaces leads in practice to the Code of Conduct we are writing down.
> Then the two sections which should probably not be part of the policy
> itself because they explain how its used. Namely the couple sections:
> -> Enforcement
> -> Committee
> Which would apply equally to the friendly space policy.
> So yeah I am late in the battle, but in short I would rather extend our
> existing friendly space policy to virtual space and create another
> document explaining how we use it (Enforcement + Committee).
Also note that the Friendly Space Policy is a WMF policy. I don't know
which process would be needed to change it, but I guess it would be some
sort of top-down process. The Code of Conduct is being drafted in a wiki
page that anyone can edit, we have 185 edits by 22 contributors so far (662
edits by 46 contributors in the Talk page), and the whole process is in the
hands of the Wikimedia tech community. These are additional reasons to
consider the Code of Conduct as a better main policy, and the Friendly
Space Policy as the useful tool for events that is already now.