Skip to content
spockIt’s only logical !
Governance document. This page governs project process or conduct, not current language behavior.

Spock Code of Conduct

Our pledge

We pledge to make the Spock community welcoming, safe, and equitable for all.

We are committed to an environment that respects the dignity, rights, and contributions of every participant, regardless of characteristics including race, ethnicity, caste, color, age, physical characteristics, neurodiversity, disability, sex or gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, language, philosophy or religion, national or social origin, socioeconomic position, level of education, or other status. The same privileges of participation extend to everyone who participates in good faith and follows this Code of Conduct.

Encouraged behavior

Differences in culture, background, and native language can change how words and actions are understood. With that in mind, we agree to:

  1. Respect the purpose of the community and its ways of gathering.
  2. Engage kindly, honestly, and in good faith.
  3. Respect different viewpoints and experiences.
  4. Take responsibility for our actions and contributions.
  5. Give and receive constructive feedback gracefully.
  6. Repair harm when it occurs.
  7. Promote the safety and well-being of the community.

Spock is pre-1.0. Good-faith exploration of competing directions—including unconventional ideas and experiments the project later declines—is welcome. An idea’s novelty or conflict with current direction is not a conduct violation. Strong disagreement about a design is allowed; dismissing, belittling, or targeting the person presenting it is not.

This Code governs behavior; it does not determine whether a technical proposal is accepted. Spock’s design authority and language-change rules are defined in GOVERNANCE.md and the language-change process.

Restricted behavior

Instances, threats, and promotion of the following are violations:

  1. Harassment: violating clearly expressed boundaries or continuing unnecessary personal attention after a request to stop.
  2. Character attacks: insulting, demeaning, or pejorative comments aimed at a person or group.
  3. Stereotyping or discrimination: characterizing a person on the basis of identities or immutable traits.
  4. Sexualization: behavior that is inappropriately intimate for the context or purpose of the community.
  5. Violating confidentiality: sharing or acting on private or personal information without permission.
  6. Endangerment: causing, encouraging, or threatening violence or other harm.
  7. Other conduct that threatens the well-being of the community.

The following are also restricted:

  1. Impersonating another person, including to evade enforcement.
  2. Failing to credit sources for contributed material.
  3. Posting marketing or commercial material outside the community’s norms.
  4. Presenting material involving restricted behavior irresponsibly or without necessary context and care.

Scope

This Code applies to all Spock community spaces, including repositories, issues, pull requests, discussions, working-group and committee meetings, and project events. It also applies when someone officially represents Spock in public or private spaces, such as through an official account or as an appointed representative at an online or offline event.

Sensitive conduct and personnel matters are not published in meeting records. The public-record requirement for design meetings never overrides the privacy and safety of a reporter.

Reporting an issue

Report a possible violation privately to hello@grida.co with the subject “Spock conduct report.” This address is the contact publicly listed on the Grida GitHub organization profile, the organization that hosts Spock. Do not open a public issue for a report that contains private or safety-sensitive information.

Include, to the extent it is safe and useful:

  • what happened and when;
  • where it happened and links or records that moderators may preserve;
  • who was involved or witnessed it;
  • whether the behavior is continuing or creates an immediate safety concern;
  • any person you believe must be excluded from handling the report; and
  • how and whether you would like to be contacted.

Community Moderators will make a good-faith effort to acknowledge a report within seven calendar days, investigate promptly and fairly, limit disclosure to people needed to handle it, and prioritize the reporter’s safety and privacy. Enforcement is normally handled privately. A public statement may be made when needed to protect the community, but it will not identify a reporter without their permission.

Current reporting limitation

Spock is early and does not yet have an independent ombuds service or a dedicated private reporting system. The address above is a shared organization mailbox and may be accessible to more than one Grida operator. It is private from the public, but it is not confidential from every organization operator.

If a report concerns someone who may have access to that mailbox, name that conflict in the report if doing so is safe; recipients must route it away from the named person when an unconflicted moderator is available. If the mailbox itself is not safe to use, Spock cannot presently promise an independent confidential project channel. For conduct hosted on GitHub, use GitHub’s private abuse-reporting process instead. The Project Lead and Community Moderators must document a replacement independent path here before claiming that one exists.

Moderation and enforcement

Community Moderators are the Project Lead and any moderators appointed under GOVERNANCE.md. A moderator named in a report or materially involved in the incident must recuse. Moderators may preserve evidence, remove or edit content, restrict participation, and take other proportionate steps needed to keep the community safe.

When an investigation finds a violation, moderators may use the following ladder. They may skip steps when severity or safety requires it.

  1. Warning
    • Event: a violation involving a single incident or related incidents.
    • Consequence: a private written warning explaining the violation.
    • Repair may include acknowledging responsibility, apologizing privately, and clarifying future expectations.
  2. Temporarily limited activities
    • Event: a repeated violation after a warning or a more serious first violation.
    • Consequence: a time-limited cooldown from specified channels, activities, or interactions.
    • Repair may include respecting the boundary, reflecting on impact, and planning a careful return.
  3. Temporary suspension
    • Event: a repeated pattern that warnings have not resolved, or a single serious violation.
    • Consequence: temporary removal from community spaces, with written conditions for return.
  4. Permanent ban
    • Event: a pattern that other measures have not resolved, or a violation so serious that continued participation cannot be made safe.
    • Consequence: permanent removal from community spaces, tools, and communication channels controlled by the project.

The ladder guides judgment; it does not limit a moderator’s ability to respond to immediate risk. Moderators will consider impact, context, repetition, power differences, safety, and credible attempts to repair harm. Retaliation against a reporter, witness, or moderator is itself a violation.

A person subject to enforcement may appeal as described in GOVERNANCE.md. An appeal does not stay a safety measure while it is reviewed.

Attribution

This Code of Conduct is adapted from Contributor Covenant 3.0. Contributor Covenant is stewarded by the Organization for Ethical Source and licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Its enforcement ladder was inspired by Mozilla’s code of conduct team.