Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: add documents CoC Committee and Incident Resolution Procedures #1013

Merged
merged 27 commits into from
Jun 5, 2024

Conversation

Barbanio
Copy link
Contributor

Updating information on the Code of Conduct Committee. Adding documents 1 (CoC Committee) and 2 (Incident Resolution Procedures)of the issue #994.

@AceTheCreator @smoya @Mayaleeeee @alequetzalli @thulieblack

@Barbanio Barbanio changed the title chore: Add documents CoC Committe and Incident Resolution Procedures chore: add documents CoC Committe and Incident Resolution Procedures Jan 10, 2024
@Barbanio Barbanio changed the title chore: add documents CoC Committe and Incident Resolution Procedures chore: add documents CoC Committee and Incident Resolution Procedures Jan 10, 2024
@Barbanio Barbanio mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2024
10 tasks

### Submit in writing

To report a violation in writing, please email [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), which goes to all primary (not alternate) members of the AsyncAPI Code of Conduct Committee (CoC Committee). If you do not want your report to be received by all members of the CoC Committee, either because you want to submit a report anonymously or because one of the CoC Committee members has a conflict of interest, you may send your report directly to any individual member of the CoC Committee.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@derberg shall we tell Linux Foundation to add this email user?

Also we need to decide how we wanna operate as CoC Commitee regarding email watching. Shall those emails act as a redirect to all of our personal emails? Rather, shall some of us get access to that email account and check email manually from time to time? Maybe we could do some automation via Slack?

Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya Feb 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Additionally, we can set an Slack Workflow (super easy to create, just few clicks) so people can report through an Slack action. Just an example:

Slack_1IEilwbj@2x

The data collected can be posted into a private channel where only the CoC Committee is present. This won't work for anonymous reports but for non-anonymous. However, it will IMHO add good value by letting users quickly send reports of violations, especially those that were not targeted to them, turning those "I will write an email later" into actions).

cc @Barbanio

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the idea! Wdyt, @AceTheCreator?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have doubts if [email protected] is the best solution that assures people feel safe to report problem.

Generic email - you have in the end no idea who has access to it.

Yeah I know other communities do it this way.... but I find it pretty strange.

Why not being transparent:

  • mention who people can reach out
  • have some kind of online form, that people can use to fill in report

This way we can 100% assure only the right people will get report.

With generic email - admins of Google Workspace (Fran, and also Me) will also have access. Not saying we will violate the trust...but still - it is not 100% safe solution

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@derberg your suggestion is that the reports should be posted either via DM to a member of the CoC Committee or via form and posted automatically to the private channel the CoC Committee has?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@thulieblack any particular reason why Joanna Lee (LF legal expert) advised against it?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok then, so we go with generic email but also transparently mention emails of committee members in case of people want to reach out to them directly instead of generic email?

Copy link
Member

@AceTheCreator AceTheCreator Mar 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yea, that'll be the best way in my opinion

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we go for email, we should need then @asyncapi.org (or .com) emails to give trust and to avoid mixing personal stuff IMHO. WDYT?


### Submit in spoken conversation

If you prefer to report the violation in a spoken conversation, you may request a virtual meeting with a CoC Committee member. If the incident occurs at an event, you may report the incident in person either to a member of the AsyncAPI CoC member or a [Technical Steering Committee](https://www.asyncapi.com/community/tsc) (TSC) member.
Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya Jan 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or a Technical Steering Committee (TSC) member.

Then this means (to me) all TSC members need to be aware of all the processes regarding the CoC. We could ping them all at some point when all of this get merged to let them know.
Wondering if dealing with CoC reports could be something some members could feel uncomfortable 🤔

Additionally, we could also recommend to, in case there are no members of the Committee to contact via email.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It makes sense. It's a very good idea. All TSC members should know the CoC, especially in case they have to act in an emergency situation.

Regarding contact by email, this is the first option given in the previous section: Submit in writing.


### Communicating the Results

An incident is considered “resolved” when the CoC Committee has completed its investigation and either (a) determined what remediation actions are needed to resolve an incident (including determining that the involved parties’ agreed-upon resolution is adequate) (b) or determined that the CoC was not violated and no remediation is needed. When the incident is resolved, a member of the CoC Committee will inform the person who submitted the report. The CoC Committee will determine how much information to share with the reporter regarding the committee’s findings and what remediation steps were taken, if any, taking into consideration the privacy, confidentiality, and potential impact to the individuals involved in the incident. Notification to the accused person shall follow [Notification to the Accused Person](#notification-to-the-accused-person). The CoC Committee will also determine what information, if any, is necessary to share publicly or with community and project leaders. Any communication regarding the results of the investigation will be confidential.
Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya Feb 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

determined what remediation actions are needed to resolve an incident

I would expect not only know which actions to take but some kind of follow up I guess? not sure if this is out of our bandwidth tbh

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, maybe makes sense. How about contacting the person(s) who were affected a month or three months after resolving the conflict to see how things are going?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes totally sense.

Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe some of the comments I added are related to the CNCF CoC incident resolution doc, so feel free to discard if you believe it should.


### Confirmation of Jurisdiction

After a report is submitted, the AsyncAPI CoC Committee will confirm who has jurisdiction over the incident under the Jurisdiction and Escalation Policy. If the CoC Committee does not have jurisdiction, it will escalate the incident to the TSC. Reporters will be notified if this occurs unless they reported anonymously and did not provide their contact information. If the CoC Committee does have jurisdiction and is not required to escalate it, the committee will proceed to investigate and resolve the incident.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question: what do you mean by "Confirmation of Jurisdiction"?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This refers to the CoC committee deciding if there is a conflict of interest, who is in charge of the report, and similar things. Anyway, I believe this section refers to this supplementary document. I don't know if it makes sense to keep the section or to have a similar document.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suggest having a similar document separately, but that's just my opinion 😉

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Conflicting with my suggestion https://github.com/asyncapi/community/pull/1013/files#r1489429536 😅
I suggested to just write a small section, because the CNCF one is way bigger because, yes, CNCF is a foundation.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hehe, I was just suggesting. Maybe we can improve the section according to our circumstances and still keep it in one document.

@thulieblack
Copy link
Member

IMO I think we have resolved the major stuff @deberg, any other concerns before we go ahead?

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Mar 13, 2024

After a month, I closed the discussion that let the @asyncapi/tsc_members know their responsibilities regarding the CoC and it's incident resolution.

Additionally, I created the following issue so we add the requirement of reading and accepting the CoC for any future new TSC member. #1097

cc @derberg

@thulieblack thulieblack mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2024
**Full Members**:

- [Azeez Elegbede](https://github.com/acethecreator)
- [Barbaño González](https://github.com/barbanio)
Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya Apr 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [Barbaño González](https://github.com/barbanio)

Based on https://github.com/orgs/asyncapi/discussions/682#discussioncomment-7229097, @Mayaleeeee @alequetzalli @thulieblack @derberg Any of you are willing to become a full CoC Committee member?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I feel too overwhelmed to be able to say yes 😿

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm still okay with supporting the Committee as a secondary member.

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented May 28, 2024

/ptal

@asyncapi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@derberg @alequetzalli @AceTheCreator Please take a look at this PR. Thanks! 👋

@quetzalliwrites
Copy link
Member

Can we merge already? 😆

@thulieblack
Copy link
Member

Looks ready to me 🚀🚀

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Jun 5, 2024

/rtm

@asyncapi-bot asyncapi-bot merged commit 1e64010 into asyncapi:master Jun 5, 2024
8 checks passed
@smoya smoya deleted the code_of_conduct branch June 5, 2024 09:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants