Node.js is adopting an official Discord server for the Community - CoC review is needed

[ovflowd]

Hey folks 👋 the Node.js project has been in talks about creating an official Discord community by repurposing an existing Discord community (details here: nodejs/admin#872);

This issue requests that the Foundation review its CoC to verify that it follows its requirements. Since it will become an official space for an official OpenJS project, it is essential that their CoC fulfills our requirements.

Their current CoC also follows the Contributor Covenant 2.0 (based on Node.js's CoC but adapted for use on the Discord platform; since Discord is a communication app/platform, it is very different from GitHub.

Here is the diff: nodeiflux/documents@a976e08#diff-13936941ef00c85a7f555aa9ec176552f9965f0d2eeadd5ea95c541d5cd09bfb

I've requested @vcarl (the owner of said Discord community) to, if possible:

• Update the report email address to [email protected]
• Update the base version of their Contributor Covenant to Contributor Covenant 2.1

I'd also like the CPC to review their CoC to ensure everything is good. Thank you!

[ljharb]

why are the changes needed? both the node slack and IRC have used node's code of conduct verbatim for many years without any issue.

[ovflowd]

why are the changes needed? both the node slack and IRC have used node's code of conduct verbatim for many years without any issue.

They are already using this CoC -- I want to retify that this CoC is also OK for us. It has also been working fine for them for a long period of years.

[mhdawson]

@ovflowd my understanding was that the existing moderation team was going to continue to moderate the Discord server with the Node.js moderation team being added for visibility.

In that context would it make sense to have a different report email alias (maybe [email protected]) that would include the discord moderation team members as well as the Node.js moderation team ?

[ovflowd]

@ovflowd my understanding was that the existing moderation team was going to continue to moderate the Discord server with the Node.js moderation team being added for visibility.

In that context would it make sense to have a different report email alias (maybe [email protected]) that would include the discord moderation team members as well as the Node.js moderation team ?

Yup, that's the idea. I already opened a PR on nodejs/email for that, if you'd like to check that 👀

[PaulaPaul]

No concerns - (this was discussed at the CPC call on 20 Aug) just wanted to share that it may be helpful to include the new Discord on the Node.js website and potentially the OpenJS Foundation website to help connet with the community.

[tobie]

Discussed in the CPC today. Waiting for follow-up from @ovflowd on the pending questions raised by the CPC in our last call:

• What is the rationale for not using the foundation's CoC?
• How official will this server be? If this is a verified server it implies that it is tied to the foundation and hence will need to adopt the foundation's CoC verbatim.

[vcarl]

What is the rationale for not using the foundation's CoC?

We are an independent moderation team that has demonstrated an ability to safely operate an online community space since 2018, we have not been asked to substantively alter our moderation processes. I found that the existing Node.js Code of Conduct was mostly in line with how we've been operating, but felt that our own CoC was important to distinguish that we are independently operated (though ultimately accountable to the foundation).

The changes I've made are:

• changed the report email (I need to update this, this change sparked a conversation about what email to use)
• elaborated on expectations for changes to behavior requested by moderators over time.
• changed "temporary ban" to "timeout", as that's the name of a Discord feature for limiting participation
• changed 'serious violation' to 'violation' in describing when a timeout may be used
• changed 'permanent ban' to 'ban' in the Discord, which reflects the process we've used for appealing a ban historically
• added details about who is eligible to appeal a ban
• credited Node.js and Reactiflux as inspiration for the CoC

[ljharb]

@vcarl "permanent" doesn't mean "can't be appealed", it means "has no automatic expiry"

[ovflowd]

No concerns - (this was discussed at the CPC call on 20 Aug) just wanted to share that it may be helpful to include the new Discord on the Node.js website and potentially the OpenJS Foundation website to help connet with the community.

It will be done at the moment we release it!

[PaulaPaul]

@joesepi will reach out to @ovflowd to chat (Paula to sit in for education/help if appropriate)

[tobie]

CPC call update: discussed this today. Want to find a pathway forward. @joesepi to follow-up with @ovflowd.

[tobie]

Notes from today's CPC call:

Following up on last week's working session on this topic, we noted that:

• This is mostly a Node TSC decision
• CPC decisions are limited to: (1) Discord server has to either be the official one or a separate entity, there is no middle ground here. (2) if the server is the official one, it has to adopt the foundation’s official code of conduct.

[ovflowd]

CTA:

• Check-in with Carl regarding the status of the work on his side :)

[tobie]

Notes from today's CPC call:

Waiting on @ovflowd driving the conversation on their end. Removing CPC label for now. @ovflowd, feel free to add the label back in once you're ready for the CPC's input.

[ovflowd]

@mcollina happy to mention that they adopted our Coc - https://github.com/nodeiflux/documents/blob/main/CONDUCT.md

This doesn't change the already approved stance the Node.js TSC had before. What are our next steps here?

I recall the CPC needs to approve the usage of the Node.js brand on the Discord server, right? Or what else needs to be approved? :)

[mcollina]

The next steps are:

1. agreement with the TSC that nodeiflux becomes the official discord
2. adding the key personnel of nodeiflux to the Node.js org for official comunications
3. adding key personnel to Node.js to nodeiflux as admins
4. optionally rebrand nodeiflux as "Node.js"

I don't think the CPC should be involved at all.

[ovflowd]

The next steps are:

1. agreement with the TSC that nodeiflux becomes the official discord
2. adding the key personnel of nodeiflux to the Node.js org for official comunications
3. adding key personnel to Node.js to nodeiflux as admins
4. optionally rebrand nodeiflux as "Node.js"

I don't think the CPC should be involved at all.

1. This was already done within the issue opened within the TSC
2. That is already done. They already have an alias email and a direct Slack channel to communicate with us (Node.js Moderation team)
3. To be done, once the server is almost ready
4. That is definitely going to happen; The whole point is to be named "Node.js" and contain its branding 🙈

[ovflowd]

Also here's a copy of their CoC now: https://github.com/nodeiflux/documents/blob/main/CONDUCT.md

[mcollina]

This was already done within the issue opened within the TSC

Frankly, this has not happened. The TSC has approved it, but up to the latest call with the CPC, there was no clarity of what it meant to be official. So yeah, I think it's better to have another pass, with the lead of nodeiflux in the call.

[ovflowd]

This was already done within the issue opened within the TSC

Frankly, this has not happened. The TSC has approved it, but up to the latest call with the CPC, there was no clarity of what it meant to be official. So yeah, I think it's better to have another pass, with the lead of nodeiflux in the call.

Is Carl's presence required? Since I'm the intermediary, I can be on the TSC call. Otherwise, @vcarl, let us know if you want to join the TSC call, and we can schedule it.

[mcollina]

We would need @vcarl.