Talk:Code of Conduct

When I created this page originally I grabbed Maloki's copy of the CoC, I switched it to Stephen's copy after Maloki suggested it in the discord channel since it's had a lot more work done on it --Satsuma (talk) 02:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

The first edit is the googledoc basically untouched (I had to make a number of formatting fixes, but no content was changed) the second includes some edits that were discussed by Stephen and I on the googledoc to reduce redundancy, but, due to the brainstorming nature of the original document, there's still a fair amount of redundant phrasing - feel free to clean this up --Satsuma (talk) 02:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Extreme Abuse Media

sorry another big long topic discussion from me, and a depressing one at that. i was looking back at the norway/holland location suggestion in the discord and saw talk of ao3 as a good inspiration. they do seem very competant legally. But ao3 does have a major problem that i don't think we should emulate: they host a very large amount of content that normalizes and sexualizes abuse... even if they actually enforced any kind of "no sexualization of minors" rule, there still would be a lot of unavoidable content on there that is just straight up presenting stuff like pedophilia, incest, and other clear forms of grotesque abuse in an uncritical light. this stuff can be a problem! it is used to groom people, especially children, and just generally promotes abuse/rape culture. i think we should put something preventative in the CoC regarding this? there is gonna be a some content that's in a grey area for "is this abuse, is it being cast in a positive/uncritical light", but there's also gonna be a lot of stuff that is quite clearly not in the grey. content like this is very prevalent in some areas of the internet, has been actively used by predators, and can just generally be unsavory and offputting. the CoC takes action on the behalf of many at risk groups and survivors of trauma, and i think it would be a good idea to also take into consideration potential&current abuse victims in this additional manner. idk how it would be worded in the actual CoC though? maybe under banned content "original media that sexualises or romanticises abuse such as pedophilia and incest" would work? I just don't want large swaths of the fork to end up like ao3 and many corners of twitter/etc, where people who just want to use the site have uncomfortably live alongside stuff like this and even fall victim to it. --Wovenflowers (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Archive of Our Own is a useful reference for certain topics (such as the practicalities of being an entirely online non-profit, or running an organization that depends on volunteer written code despite having a largely non-technical user base, or how tf do you fundraise) but, due to the technical and social differences between being a social network and a writing archive, we have a very different situation in regards to our content policies and Code of Conduct. So far, nothing from this document has been drawn from Ao3's code of conduct, nor is it something I'm expecting to happen in the future. --Satsuma (talk) 02:43, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Oh I don't think anyone was looking to emulate AO3's CoC, it's just the mention of AO3 reminded me of a concern I had. I would think people would get in trouble posting this kind of thing even if it wasn't in the CoC, especially if there is already a competent established moderation culture like there would hopefully be in the fork, I'm just worried about it still because I've seen it be a very destructive force before. --Wovenflowers (talk) 18:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Post Dissemination

"No posting and/or disseminating a person’s posts, including screen captures or any other content without express permission" I think the core idea of this is good but it could turn out poorly in some situations if not further elaborated. Does it apply to DMs as well? Is "express permission" referring to the person whos posts are being shared? Probably, but it should be explicitly clear. Also, can these rules get in the way of warning people of abuse? "X popular user said things that made me uncomfortable, I'd like to share this fact with my friends, and I'd like to accurately share what specifically was said." If the user isn't able to specifically share the other users posts, this post dissemination rule encourages them to paraphrase and therefore misrepresent what X actually said. On the other hand post dissemination being too lax opens up pathways for mass mockery and toxicity. Proposed alternative "No posting and/or disseminating a person’s posts or DMs, including screen captures or any other content without express permission from that person. The only exception is if the person has posted content that one wishes to warn others about in a serious and responsible manner." That's not perfect though I think. I don't know how to feel about this one. Thoughts? --Wovenflowers (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)