charter/discussion.mdwn

   1 # Discussion and commentary on Libre-SOC Member Agreement
   2
   3 # The Code of Honour
   4
   5 It's called a Code of "Honour", not a Code of "Conduct", for a reason.
   6 A Code of "Honour" is a positive and clear statement.  Everyone knows
   7 the difference between "good" and "bad".  Codes of "Conduct" on the
   8 other hand have nothing to do with honour, and by the time the reader
   9 has finished going through a horrific list of "proscribed behaviours",
  10 what are the chances that they will actually genuinely feel that the
  11 project is *actually* safe and welcoming?
  12
  13 Codes of "Conduct" are based on the assumption of guilt and a
  14 predisposition of participants to exclusionary, disruptive and
  15 unwelcoming behavior.  It assumes - in advance and up front -
  16 that they are incapable of knowing the difference between right and
  17 wrong, and patronises them with a horrifically toxic - and by
  18 definition inadequate and incomplete - "proscribed list".
  19
  20 A Code of *Honour* inherently empowers participants with the
  21 responsibility to know (or learn) and act upon the difference
  22 between right and wrong, good and bad.  That alone says "we
  23 trust you, empower you, and require you, to act responsibly",
  24 for the benefit of all, including yourself, as part of this
  25 Organisation.
  26
  27 # The Systemic Laws of Organisations.
  28
  29 The Systemic Laws are explained below.
  30
  31 ## Everyone belongs
  32
  33 Every contributor and their contributions and achievements are recognised.
  34 This further encourages people to contribute; they feel welcome, and their
  35 efforts valued.
  36
  37 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/4fb42f906d5101301d7a001dd8b71c47" width="400" />
  38
  39 ## Reality is acknowledged and accepted
  40
  41 Denial of reality is the quickest way to kill the effectiveness of an
  42 organisation.  Acceptance and acknowledgement of the facts, without
  43 judgement, subsequently allows analysis to take place so that corrections
  44 can be applied.
  45
  46 To reach a goal, it is necessary to have four things: (1) a model (2)
  47 observations of reality (3) a comparative analysis system and
  48 (4) a corrective feedback loop.  Whilst (1, 3 and 4) are sufficiently
  49 obvious and objective that nobody really thinks much about them, when
  50 things get hard it is often challenging for people to objectively face
  51 reality, particularly if other Systemic Laws are being violated as well.
  52
  53 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/6ab84f80e4d101382714005056a9545d" width="400" />
  54
  55 ## Everyone is respected and honoured, past and present
  56
  57 When someone leaves a project, even under less than ideal circumstances,
  58 it is still vitally important to value and respect both them *and* their
  59 contributions.
  60 Even when things are difficult, a person can teach you valuable lessons,
  61 by example of how you *don't* want things to continue in the future.
  62
  63 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/0548b7909ee3012f2fe600163e41dd5b" width="400" />
  64
  65 ## Role, Seniority and Expertise are all respected.
  66
  67 This can be very challenging, particularly when someone with more expertise
  68 meets someone whose length of service is greater.
  69
  70 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/c1cd41e09f8c012f2fe600163e41dd5b" width="400" />
  71
  72 ## We accept the responsibility of our position
  73
  74 If we choose a position of responsibility, we must actually acknowledge and
  75 accept the responsibility of that role!  People will be relying on us.
  76
  77 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/de754040f11401382b97005056a9545d" width="400" />
  78
  79 ## Everyone is rewarded equitably for their contributions
  80
  81 In a "Libre" context this is often extremely hard to do, as the normal
  82 rules of profit-maximising business (do not provide goods or services
  83 until payment has been received) do not apply: our "product" - the
  84 source code - is made available at zero monetary cost.  So it is down
  85 to us to ensure that part of our time is spent making sure that everyone
  86 *is* actually rewarded, whether through contracts, sponsorship, donations,
  87 crowd-funding and profit-sharing in the same, and so on.
  88
  89 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/e1ee2ec09e16012f2fe500163e41dd5b" width="400" />
  90
  91 ## Everyone is responsible, credited, and accountable (for the "good" *and* the "bad")
  92
  93 When we do something well, it is vital that we (alone) own and hold the
  94 credit for that achievement (nobody else takes the credit; we *accept*
  95 the credit).  When we screw up, it is just as equally vital that we take
  96 responsibility for cleaning up our mess, and that nobody else is blamed
  97 *or think they own it*, or tries to take the task away from us!
  98
  99 In this way, two vitally important things happen.  Firstly: we can rely
 100 on each other, as we trust that the tasks that others chose will be
 101 completed (even if they mess up a few times).  Secondly: in our chosen
 102 opportunity to grow and learn, we know and trust that nobody will take
 103 that away from us, and, further, that our achievements and the credit
 104 will be ours.
 105
 106 <img src="https://assets.amuniversal.com/a19b8990f08a01382b5a005056a9545d" width="400" />
 107
 108 # Decision-making and new contributors
 109
 110 This section has two aspects.  The first is that everything but unanimous
 111 decision-making is disempowering and de-motivating (harmful).  Majority
 112 rule (mob rule) is easily demonstrated to be so: anyone *not* in the
 113 majority quickly gives up in resignation, even if their contribution is
 114 critically important (and in the political arena, "Minority Representative
 115 Groups" form as a direct result).  Unanimous decision-making requires
 116 that the issue be discussed until it is fully understood by *all* members
 117 (or members recognise that they do not or cannot understand the issue,
 118 and abstain).
 119
 120 The introduction of new contributors really requires specially spelling
 121 out.  The last thing that is needed is for a new contributor to introduce
 122 changes that drain the time and resources of prior contributors to the
 123 point where the project fails.  Unanimous decision-making ensures that
 124 all members (who inherently have a longer term of service to the project
 125 than any new member) have the right to veto proposals that disrupt the
 126 project.  In a "mob rule" scenario, there is the potential for enough
 127 new members to join simultaneously that they could easily completely
 128 take over the project.  Unanimous decision making prevents this scenario.
 129
 130 It is also worthwhile noting on the subject of unanimous decision-making:
 131 its effectiveness decreases as the number of contributors goes significantly
 132 above around eight.  If that occurs, delegate!  Form sub-projects, agree
 133 roles and responsibilities, and go for it.  Divide and conquer.