A code of conduct is a set of rules outlining the norms, roles, and responsibilities or proper practices of an individual party or an organization.
This Code of Conduct document outlines our expectations for participants within the team as well as this online repository (and the ideas, projects, and collaborations that might emerge from it). We also provide steps to reporting any concern, an uncomfortable situation or unacceptable behaviour by other participants. We are committed to providing a welcoming, collaborative and inspiring experience for all members of this team and expect our code of conduct to be honoured.
We as members, contributors, and leaders are committed to making participation in our team a supportive and harassment-free experience for everyone. We commit to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy team, as well as the communities we facilitate. We encourage everyone in the team to participate in all team activities and work.
We are committed to facilitating Communities of Practice that are connected with each others' work. Although we will fail at times, we seek to treat everyone as fairly and equally as possible. Whenever a member has made a mistake, we expect them to take responsibility for it. If someone has been harmed or offended, it is our responsibility to listen carefully and respectfully and do our best to right the wrong.
Although this list cannot be exhaustive, we explicitly honour diversity in age, gender, gender identity or expression, culture, ethnicity, language, national origin, political beliefs, profession, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and technical ability. We will not tolerate discrimination based on any of the protected characteristics above, including participants with visible or invisible disabilities.
-
4.1 Be friendly and patient.
-
4.2 Be welcoming: we strive to build a welcoming and supportive team. As community facilitators, we also strive to apply this value to creating Communities of Practice that welcome and support members of all backgrounds and identities, while upholding our commitment and diversity statement (see 2.).
-
4.3 Be considerate: Your work will be used by other people, and you in turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you take will affect users and colleagues, and you should take those consequences into account when making decisions. Remember that we're an open source project. This means that contributors might not be communicating in their primary language.
-
4.4 Be respectful: Not all of us will agree all the time, but disagreement is no excuse for poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to turn into a personal attack. It’s important to remember that a project where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one.
-
4.5 Be careful in the words that we choose: We are professionals, and we conduct ourselves professionally. Be kind to others. Do not insult or put down other participants. Harassment and other exclusionary behaviour aren't acceptable. This includes, but is not limited to Violent threats or language directed against another person, discriminatory jokes and language, posting sexually explicit or violent material, posting (or threatening to post) other people’s personally identifying information (“doxing”), personal insults, especially those using racist or sexist terms, unwelcome sexual attention, advocating for or encouraging, any of the above behaviour, and repeated harassment of others. In general, if someone asks you to stop, then stop.
-
4.6 Try to understand why we disagree: Disagreements, both social and technical, happen all the time. We must resolve disagreements and differing views constructively. Remember that we’re different. Diversity contributes to the strength of our work, which is composed of people from a wide range of backgrounds. Different people have different perspectives on issues. Being unable to understand why someone holds a viewpoint doesn’t mean that they’re wrong. Don’t forget that it is human to err and blaming each other doesn’t get us anywhere. Instead, focus on helping to resolve issues and learning from mistakes.
5.1 Examples of behaviour that contributes to a positive environment for our community include:
- Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people
- Being respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences
- Gracefully giving and accepting constructive feedback
- Accepting responsibility for harm done to people and/or communities, correcting our mistakes, and learning from the experience to avoid future harm
- Focusing on what is best not just for us as individuals, but for the overall community in the long term
5.2 Examples of unacceptable behaviour include:
- Trolling or insulting people in any interaction (online or in person)
- Using aggressive, derogatory or derisive comments
- Making personal or political attacks
- Public or private harassment of any kind
- Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or email address, without their explicit permission
- Inflicting emotional distress
- Any conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
- The use of sexualised language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind
We want to establish a Code of Conduct that focuses on creating a welcoming and safe environment for everyone involved. If a participant does not abide by the Code of Conduct, we will use the “restorative practices” approach to handle the situation (see International Institute for Restorative Practices).
The restorative practice has its roots in indigenous practices employed in cultures all over the world. This is a way of looking at wrongdoing that focuses on repairing the harm done to people and relationships rather than on punishing offenders or wrongdoers. Restorative practices form the basis for “restorative justice,” a term coined in 1970 in the context of social work and justice systems.
Restorative practices are based on the belief that human beings are happier, more cooperative and productive, and more likely to make positive changes in their behaviour when those in positions of authority do things with them, rather than to them or for them. The most critical function of restorative practices is restoring and building relationships. People in charge must meet with those they have wronged, explore what happened, and make necessary amends.
- Focuses on harm rather than the intention of wrongdoers.
- Prioritises persons affected and the consequent needs of victims and safety in communities.
- Addresses obligations of the wrongdoer resulting from those harms, as well as the team/community’s obligations to both victims and wrongdoers.
- Creates an opportunity for all individuals in this team, who have a legitimate stake in a given situation, to be heard and their concerns addressed.
- Seeks to right the wrongs that have been done so that victims feel safe and valued, and when possible and safe, wrongdoers feel restored to the team/community.
- Uses inclusive, collaborative processes giving fair opportunity to right the wrongs.
- Acknowledges that trust, safe spaces and relationships are central to community building.
- Must establish policies and procedures that handle incident reports in a way that strengthens relationships.
- Focuses on harms done rather than rules broken.
- Gives voice to the person who has been harmed.
- Engages in collaborative problem-solving.
- Empowers change and growth for all involved.
- Enhances responsibility for actions and attitudes of all involved.
Restorative Practice Principles and Disciplines should guide the Open Research Community Management Team in creating a safe, friendly and enjoyable space for collaboration and support.
We will apply restorative practices in report handling and enforcement as described in 12.1.1 and 12.2.2.
The restorative practice statements and report handling process have been derived from the Eastern University Academic Charter School (EUACS) Student Code of Conduct derived from the work of Ted Wachtel at International Institute for Restorative Practices (IIRP) (download file).
Restorative Practice Principles are based on Amstutz and Mullet (2005). Restorative Discipline for Schools, pp. 25-26. The Little Book of Restorative Discipline for Schools.
7.1 This Code of Conduct applies to all team members participating in the activities, events and processes taking place within the Open Research Community Management Team. Specifically, our Code of Conduct applies to any conduct:
- in interactions within the team/community
- at any team activity, communication or event
- outside the team activity when a team member is representing projects associated with the team
7.2 This Code of Conduct also applies to individuals outside this team officially representing the community in public spaces.
Examples of representing our community include using an official e-mail address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed a representative at an online or offline event.
7.3 This Code of Conduct also applies to individuals engaging with this repository
for instance, in interactions on GitHub issues and Pull Requests or activities taking place in the context of the Open Research Community Management Team.
7.4 Mediating interaction or communication between reporter and reportee is not in the scope of this Code of Conduct to maintain reporters' confidentiality (see 10.3). The collaboration and dialogues based on restorative practices will take place between the reporter and the person handling the Code of Conduct, as well as between the reportee and the person handling the Code of Conduct separately.
Community leaders are responsible for clarifying and enforcing our standards of acceptable behaviour and will take appropriate and fair corrective, restorative and action in response to any behaviour that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.
Community leaders have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, and will communicate reasons for moderation decisions when appropriate.
Instances of trolling, harassing, abusive, or otherwise unacceptable behaviour should be reported to the community leaders responsible for enforcement. If noticed by community leaders, incidents should be recorded and shared with one or more members of the Open Research Community Management Team for transparency.
All reports will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.
All community leaders are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident. Together we strive to foster an environment where everyone feels valued, respected, and included.
10.1 Code of Conduct Contact for Reporting
If you experience or witness unacceptable behaviour, or have any other concerns, please report it by contacting the Team Lead, Malvika Sharan (email: msharan@turing.ac.uk). Malvika will involve the Senior Research Community Managers except when any potential conflict of interest with any of them may arise.
To report an issue involving the team lead, please email directly to Emma Karoune (email: ekaroune@turing.ac.uk).
You can directly contact the Tools, Practices and Systems Programme Director, Kirstie Whitaker (kwhitaker@turing.ac.uk). You can also reach out to our Programme Manager Arielle Bennett (abennett@turing.ac.uk) - who is also our appointed ombudsperson.
10.2 In your report please include:
-
Your contact information.
-
Names (real, nicknames, or pseudonyms) of any individuals involved. If there are additional witnesses, please include them as well. Your account of what occurred, and if you believe the incident is ongoing. If there is a publicly available record (e.g. a mailing list archive or a public IRC logger), please include a link.
-
Any additional information that may be helpful.
10.3 Confidentiality of Reporter(s)
We will respect the confidentiality of reporter(s) all the time to protect individuals who have been harmed. In case the reporter's identity can not be hidden (if easily identified through the details of the report), the person handling the Code of Conduct report will discuss the possible ways to protect reporters from future incidents.
- 11.1 Reporter: Person reporting an incident.
- 11.2 Reportee: Person being reported.
After receiving a report, the community leaders (or person handling the report), team lead or programme director, in this case, will review the incident report and follow this process to determine the cause and consequences that violated this Code of Conduct and take further actions:
Community leaders will reach out to the reporter to ask for further information if the the submitted report is not complete or needs some additional context. Community leaders will also ensure that the person impacted or harmed by the reported incident is safe and identifies how they can be further supported.
12.1.1 A meeting with the reportee will be scheduled where the person handling the report will discuss these restorative questions:
- What happened?
- What were you thinking at the time?
- Who has been affected by what you have done? In what way?
- What do you think you need to do to make things right?
- Knowing what you know, what would you have done differently?
12.1.2 When the incident in question inflicted harm on another person, additional questions will be asked on behalf of the person(s) harmed:
- What did you think when you realized what had happened?
- What impact has this incident had on you and others?
- What has been the hardest thing for you?
- What do you think needs to happen to make things right?
The person handling the report may follow up with reportee or reporter after this discussion with any additional questions to help them reach a resolution. As per 7.4, mediating interaction or communication between reporter and reportee is not in the scope of this Code of Conduct.
The code of Conduct should be considered a norm-setting mechanism for the Open Research Community Management Team before any involvement of line managers or HR in the interactions that take place within the team.
If the reportee is a Turing employee, for instance, Senior Researcher, Senior Research Community Managers and Research Community Manager, and the incident is considered out of the scope by the report handling mechanism of this Code of Conduct due to the severity of the matter/case, the employment policies will apply.
The first step for the community leaders handling the report should be to escalate the issue to the line manager of the reportee. The line manager will be responsible for taking the disciplinary action, such as starting an HR process, formally or informally. The report will be passed to the line manager who will follow the Turing policies and the Turing's CoC policy, as well as enforcement mechanism, will take precedence over this Code of Conduct enforcement.
All the Turing employees have the obligation to read and understand the HR/People policies, which include, but not limited to:
- Workplace Guidelines
- Code of Conduct Policy
- Disciplinary Policy
- Equality and diversity policy
- Whistleblowing (Raising Concerns) Policy
- Complaints policy
- Bullying and harassment Policy
- Research Misconduct Policy
- Safeguarding policy
- Grievance procedure
- Wellbeing support services
- Research Ethics Policy
- Data protection policy
- Conflict of Interest Policy
An appropriate (external) authority (such as the reportee's employee) will be identified who can respond to the reported incident with the appropriate action. The report will be passed to the external authority with an agreement to receive an update from their enforcement process.
An internal resolution will be agreed upon to provide support for the reporter and the person(s) harmed, as well as the continued participation of the reportee (see 13). The resolution or decision made by the external authority may or may not have an impact on the internal resolution. A transparency report will be shared with the members of the Open Research Community Management team.
Here are examples of possible resolutions to a report. This list is not comprehensive, and any action necessary to reach a fair resolution will be taken as needed. Possible resolutions to an incident include:
- a private communication from community leaders, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behaviour was inappropriate.
- an apology to the person harmed or the team/community as a whole - this will be done via the person handling the report.
- an action plan for the reportee to improve their awareness and correct future behaviours.
- reportee will have no interaction with the reporter (reporter name will be kept anonymous)
- reportee will have no unsolicited interaction with the reporter (in rare cases, when the reporter is not anonymous) and those enforcing the Code of Conduct. This includes avoiding interactions in community spaces as well as external channels like social media.
- not publishing the content (code, documents, media or other materials) that violated the Code of Conduct, until necessary changes have been made and agreed upon by the person handling the report.
- An imposed suspension, such as asking reportee to “take a week or month off” from the GitHub repo or team activity.
- recommended training activity relevant to correcting the behaviour or building awareness/understanding required to right the wrongs.
- a stronger warning with consequences for continued behaviour.
- if a resolution is not reached, the ombudsperson will be consulted and any delay or status update for the Code of Conduct enforcement will be communicated with the reporter and reportee.
13.1 After the Resolution is Agreed Upon
Once a resolution is agreed upon, but before it is enacted, the person handling the report will contact the reporter and any other affected parties to explain the proposed resolution. They will ask if this resolution is acceptable and must note feedback for the record. However, they are not required to act on this feedback.
The reportee will be contacted via email informing them of the resolution. A final meeting may be conducted if necessary. The person handling the report will maintain records of all reports so that they may be reviewed if stronger measures are required when repeated violations occur by the same individual as well as to improve our Code of Conduct for future participation.
All reports will be kept confidential with details shared only with people involved in report handling. If a person handling the report (team lead or programme director) is linked with the ongoing issue, they will declare their Conflict of Interest and remove themselves from any discussion related to the report handling. Resolution action may also include identifying appropriate members from within the Open Research Community Management Team if more support for the person handling the report is needed.
This code of conduct is drafted by Malvika Sharan, based on the Open Code of Conduct from the TODO Group, The Carpentries Code of Conduct and Contributor Covenant version 2.0. Community Impact Guidelines are inspired by Mozilla's code of conduct enforcement ladder. All original work should be attributed to the respective authors of these documents.
The restorative practice statements and report handling process have been derived from the Eastern University Academic Charter School (EUACS) Student Code of Conduct derived from the work of Ted Wachtel at International Institute for Restorative Practices (IIRP) (download file).
Restorative Practice Principles are based on Amstutz and Mullet (2005). Restorative Discipline for Schools, pp. 25-26. The Little Book of Restorative Discipline for Schools.