Code of Conduct#

We want all Data Hazards spaces (online or in person) to be places where people feel welcome to discuss their thoughts and ideas. This Code of Conduct (CoC) aims to ensure that those participating in the Data Hazards community are protected from abuse, harassment or discrimination, and that the discussions we have are supportive and productive.

Unacceptable behaviours#

Unacceptable behaviours will result in immediate action and potentially lead to suspension from future meetings. This being said, consistent and intentional disregard for the Discussion Guidelines below can also be regarded as unacceptable if such behaviour significantly disrupts the group and makes it an unwelcome environment for others.

Unacceptable behaviours include but are not limited to:

  • Intimidating, harassing, abusive, discriminatory, derogatory or demeaning speech or actions. Within this definition we include refusal to use a person’s stated pronouns, and denying the existence of someones’ experiences of discrimination.

  • Harmful or prejudicial verbal or written comments or visual images related to age, background, belief, disability, ethnicity, race, religion, gender, identity, national origin, sexual orientation or other personal characteristics, including those protected by law.

  • Inappropriate use of nudity and/or sexual images.

  • Real or implied threat of professional or financial damage or harm.

  • Inappropriate disruption of meetings or events.

  • Photographing, video or audio recording of slides, oral or poster presentations without presenter/author’s permission.

  • Violating the rules and regulations of the online platform (e.g. Zoom)

Discussion Guidelines#

The below Do-s and Don’t-s are guidelines to remind us all of best standards of behaviour in meetings, and to make sure the discussion environment is a welcoming place!

Do…#

  • Be respectful of differences in experience, knowledge and background.

  • Be conscious of how much space you’re taking up in a conversation; be extra conscious if you hold a privileged or dominant identity when discussing a form of inequality or oppression.

  • Give people space and time to make their point if they need it.

Don’t…#

  • Interrupt only to correct unrelated points. This derails the person speaking, and is unnecessary if the correction does not have any relevance to the point being put forward.

  • Play devil’s advocate unnecessarily: specifically, do not argue for contrarian positions that you do not actually hold.

  • Feign shock/incredulity when someone doesn’t know something you think is obvious.

Reporting Procedure#

If you have been subject to or witnessed unacceptable behaviour, either during a meeting or on this repository, then you can get in touch with either Natalie or Nina.
Natalie: n.zelenka@ucl.ac.uk
Nina: nina.dicara@bristol.ac.uk
If you would prefer to contact someone who is not directly involved in organising the group, then you can direct your concerns to the Jean Golding Institute Manager at JGI-manager@bristol.ac.uk.

Response process#

Once an incident has been reported, we will respond as quickly as possible, according to the following guidelines:

  • Severe and clear breaches of the code of conduct could result in immediate removal from a workshop.

  • In less severe cases, we will:

  • Ask reporters to fill out a short form detailing what happened.

  • Assemble a small committee of 2-5 people (which would not include anyone with conflicts of interest) who would:

    • Where appropriate, meet with the reportee to gather information. Not all committee members need to attend this meeting, but at least two must.

    • The committee would then meet to determine whether or not the code of conduct was breached and whether we need to amend the code of conduct for the future.

    • The committee would also determine what an appropriate response would be to best protect our community from harm.

Responses could include:

  • A warning (verbally or via email) to the party who has breached the code of conduct.

  • Ensuring that the reporter and reported person are not allocated to the same small group activities.

  • Banning from future workshops as an attendee, and/or as a facilitator.

  • Removal from contributing on GitHub.

  • Removal from our Slack workspace.

This CoC was originally developed for Data Ethics Club, and is based on content from the Jean Golding Institute’s CoC for online events, Arizona Diversity Journal Club CoC, and the Recurse Centre’s Social Rules. If you would like to suggest an addition or amendment then you can make an issue, submit a PR or email us.