Description
To me, the CfA Code of Conduct seems full of confusing, verbose, and negative legalese. It feels more like an SAT comprehension test than a visionary and welcoming public document. On the other end of the spectrum, I find Exercism's CoC very clear and approachable.
I don't want to word-smith for it's own sake, but I think two of the most important features of a Code of Conduct (besides the content) are its clarity and readability.
So, I was wondering has CfA ever tested this document against real users?
- How do they feel after reading it?
- Do they feel welcome and know what to expect (particularly if they're part of a protected class)?
- What are their impressions of the organization after reading it?
- Do they feel confident enforcing this code of conduct (particularly if they're a leader)?
- Can they accurately identify violations when quizzed with example situations?
Those are just some ideas of how to measure the document's effectiveness. A bonus of measuring effectiveness is that it could help us make purposeful improvements without pointless word-smithing.
I'm also thinking about doing an unconference workshop to hack on the CoC together at the upcoming 2018 Brigade Congress, so contact me if you're interested (tim | codefornashville.org).