Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Conduct

Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Conduct
Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Conduct
18 March 2024
More details about this document
This version:
Latest published version:
Latest editor's draft:
Previous version:
History:
Commit history
Editors:
Tzviya Siegman
Wiley
Anqi Li(Angel)
W3C
Ada Rose Cannon
Samsung
Wendy Reid
Rakuten Kobo
Feedback:
GitHub w3c/PWETF
pull requests
new issue
open issues
2024
World Wide Web Consortium
W3C
liability
trademark
and
permissive document license
rules apply.
Abstract
W3C
's
Code of Conduct
defines
expected and unacceptable behaviors and promotes high standards of
professional practice. The goals of this Code are to:
Ensure that everyone who participates is treated equitably and with respect.
Define a standard of acceptable behavior for the organization.
Contribute to the identity of the organization.
Identify unacceptable behaviors.
Provide guidance to participants on addressing issues.
Status of This Document
This document is the
W3C
Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC) and has been retitled Code of Conduct to reflect its scope and content. If there is a reference to the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (CEPC) in a
W3C
document or space, it is referring to this document.
This document has been reviewed by
W3C
Members and is endorsed by
W3C
as the W3C Code of Conduct. This document supersedes the
2020 CEPC
This document was developed by the
Positive Work Environment Community Group
Updates to the Code of Conduct
The Code of Conduct is maintained by the Positive Work Environment Community Group, under delegation from the Advisory Board. In order to keep the Code up to date with the needs and scope of
W3C
, PWE will routinely review and update the Code as needed, as per the
relevant section of the Process
If you have any concerns or issues with the Code of Conduct, they can be logged at any time in the
PWE GitHub repository
1.
Introduction
W3C
is a growing and global community where
participants
choose
to work together.
W3C
is committed to maintaining a positive working
environment, where each participant feels appreciated and respected and
where everyone adheres to the same high level of standards of personal
behavior. In that process we experience differences in language,
location, nationality, and experience. In such a diverse environment,
misunderstandings and disagreements happen, which in most cases can be
resolved informally.
W3C
's
Code of Conduct
is useful to define accepted and
acceptable behaviors
and to
promote high standards of professional practice. The goal of this Code
of conduct is to ensure that
W3C
is an environment where everyone who
participates is treated equitably and with respect, including being able to participate without fear of
harassment
. It also provides a
benchmark for self evaluation and acts as a vehicle for better identity
of the organization.
The Code is complemented by a set of
Procedures
and applies
to any member of the
W3C
community – staff, members, invited experts,
and
participants
in
W3C
meetings,
W3C
teleconferences,
W3C
mailing lists, Code repositories,
W3C
conferences or
W3C
functions, etc.
Note that this Code complements rather than replaces legal rights and
obligations pertaining to any particular situation.
Education and training
materials
are available from the
Positive Work Environment public homepage
2.
Statement of Intent
W3C
is committed to maintaining a
positive
work environment for all, including and especially those from historically
marginalized communities
. This commitment calls for a workplace where
participants
at all levels behave according to the rules of the
following Code. A foundational concept of this Code is that
we all
share responsibility
for our work environment.
3.
Code of Conduct
3.1
Expected Behavior
Treat each other with respect,
professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences
and strengths, including in situations of high pressure and urgency.
Appreciate and accommodate our similarities and differences. We
come from many cultures and backgrounds, ways of life, and standards
of behavior. Cultural differences can encompass everything from
official religious observances to personal habits to clothing. Be
respectful of people with different practices, attitudes, and
beliefs.
Have empathy when discussing sensitive issues. Some participants
may have experienced (or been subjected to) various forms of violence
in their lives, which may cause distress when they are reminded of
it. Avoid making jokes or callously mentioning sexual violence such
as stalking or sexual assault; in cases when the need arises to
discuss these issues and how they affect people - do so with tact and
empathy taking into account the gravity of the situation, and make
sure that
participants
are appropriately warned in advance so
they can choose to step out of these discussions.
Treat everyone with respect. We are a large community of people who are passionate
about our work, sometimes holding strong opinions and beliefs. We are
committed to dealing with each other with courtesy, respect, and
dignity at all times. Misunderstandings and disagreements do happen.
When conflicts arise, we are expected to resolve them maintaining
that courtesy, respect, and dignity, even when emotions are
heightened.
Do not accept or engage in abusive behavior in any form, whether it is
verbal, physical, sexual, or implied.
Be honest. Be truthful, sincere, forthright and, unless professional duties require confidentiality or special discretion, candid, straightforward, and frank.
Be
inclusive
and promote
diversity
. Seek diverse
perspectives. Diversity of views and of people powers innovation,
even if it is not always comfortable. Encourage all voices. Help new
perspectives be heard and listen actively.
Be aware of how much time is taken up by dominant members of the
group. If you find yourself dominating a discussion, it is especially important to step back and
encourage other voices to join in. Provide alternative ways to
contribute.
Be aware that displays of affection may complicate professional
relationships. For some people, overtly friendly disposition
towards another participant involving body contact (e.g., hugging,
touching on the arm or shoulder, or kissing) can be
an invasion of personal space, or perceived as an
unwelcome advance
Work to eliminate your own biases,
prejudices
, and discriminatory
practices.
Think of others’ needs from their point of view. Use preferred
names, titles (including pronouns), and the appropriate tone of
voice. Therefore, be formal and conservative in what you do and
liberal in what you accept from others and acknowledge the
contributions of your peers.
Accommodate participants' needs for physical distancing and other accommodations or precautions due to health concerns such as immune deficiency, allergies, or chemical sensitivity.
Be sensitive to language differences. English is the default
language of
W3C
. However, only some of us are native English
speakers. Many
participants
speak English as a second (or
third) language. People who communicate in non-native language often
struggle to understand fast and/or quiet speech and may speak louder
than they usually would when communicating in their native tongue. If
someone struggles to express their thoughts, help ensure their ideas
are adequately expressed, heard, and granted thorough consideration.
Respect confidentiality and privacy. Sometimes, matters we discuss may
fall under various
confidentiality
agreements and strict adherence to these agreements is expected. In
addition, certain pieces of information disclosed in a group setting
may be private in nature, or we may inadvertently learn confidential
information accidentally disclosed by other participants. Please
exercise good judgment, and make reasonable efforts to protect
privacy and confidentiality of all participants.
3.2
Unacceptable Behavior
Unacceptable behaviors
run counter to the Code
of Conduct. This list of
unacceptable
behaviors
does not cover every case. Each person you interact
with is unique, and behavior must be assessed on an individual level.
Ensuring that your behavior does not have a negative impact is your
responsibility.
W3C
strictly prohibits
discrimination
intimidation,
harassment
, and
bullying
of any kind and
on any basis.
Unacceptable behaviors
include, but are not limited to:
Offensive comments related to
socio-economic status
sexual orientation
, religion, race, physical appearance,
neurotype
, nationality,
mental health
, language, indigeneity, immigration status, gender,
gender identity
and
gender expression
, ethnicity, disability (both visible and invisible), caste, body, or age.
Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and
practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs,
and employment.
Misgendering
someone by deliberately referring to a person
using the wrong pronouns or by using someone's proper names or
other terms that person has asked not to be used, also known as
deadnaming
Gratuitous or off-topic sexual images or behavior in spaces where
they are not appropriate.
Physical contact and simulated physical contact (e.g., textual
descriptions like “hug” or “backrub”) without
consent
or after
a request to stop.
Threats.
Deliberate misinformation.
Incitement of violence towards any individual, including
encouraging a person to commit suicide or to engage in self-harm.
Deliberate intimidation.
Personal attacks.
Stalking or physically following or invading someone's personal space after a request to stop.
Deliberately exposing others to contagious disease.
Harassing
photography or recording, including logging online
activity for
harassment
purposes.
Sustained disruption of discussion. This may include, but
is not limited to, various common methods of engaging in bad
faith discourse such as:
disingenuously
expressing concern in order to undermine or derail a
discussion; also known as
concern trolling
Geek
Feminism Wiki
asking numerous questions about
basic concepts in an attempt to derail discussion, to
stifle participation, or to provoke a critical response in
order to appear a victim; also known as
sealioning
RationalWiki
overwhelming a debate with
many weak arguments in an attempt to cause others to waste
time refuting them; also known as
Gish Galloping
RationalWiki
repeatedly making claims already shown to be false;
also known as
argumentum ad nauseam
RationalWiki
Continuing to raise issues that bring no new information when a group decision has already been made. If you feel that your argument did not get a fair hearing, or if the outcome is otherwise unacceptable to you, contact the chairs, or follow proper escalation paths. Otherwise, accept the decision and move on. (See also
“Process §5.2.2 Managing Dissent”
.)
Repeatedly interrupting or talking over someone else.
Unwelcome sexual attention
Patterns of inappropriate social contact, such as
requesting/assuming inappropriate levels of intimacy with others.
Continued one-on-one communication after request to stop.
Deliberate disclosure of any aspect of a person’s
gender
identity
, sexuality, disability, or any other
personal attributes without their
consent
Disclosure or publication of non-harassing private communication without
consent
by the involved parties.
Use of coded language (also known as "dog whistles") used to
rally support for hate groups or to intimidate vulnerable groups.
Patronizing
language or behavior:
Intentionally or unintentionally making assumptions about the skills or knowledge of others, such as using language that implies the audience is uninformed on a topic (e.g., interjections like "I can't believe you don't know about [topic]").
Assuming that particular groups of people are technically unskilled due to their characteristics (e.g., “So easy your grandmother could do it”, which implies an older woman might not be technically competent).
Interrupting or repeatedly commenting in conversations with unneccessary clarifications or comments on audience behaviour (e.g., "I don't think you understood my previous comment...", grammar or language corrections that were not invited).
Regardless of the speaker's intentions, some phrases or constructions lead people to expect a patronizing statement to follow. For example, beginning an interjection with a phrase like "Well, actually..." can set this expectation and be taken as a sign of disrespect.
Microaggressions
, which are small comments or questions, either
intentional or unintentional, that marginalize people by
communicating hostile, derogatory, or negative beliefs. Examples
include:
Feigning surprise at someone’s lack of knowledge or awareness
about a topic.
The use of racially charged language to describe an
individual or thing.
Referring to an individual in a way that
demeans
or
challenges the validity of any part of their identity.
Mocking someone’s real or perceived accent or first language.
Retaliating, or taking adverse action, against anyone who files a complaint that someone has
violated this Code of Conduct.
3.3
Safety versus Comfort
This Code prioritizes the safety of individuals, particularly those in marginalized communities, over the comfort of others. For example, the following behaviors are presumed to be acceptable even if they make some participants uncomfortable:
Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,”
“go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”.
Communication in a tone you don’t find congenial.
Critizing oppressive behavior or assumptions, such as those that are
racist
sexist
, or
cissexist
Note that claims of perceived "reverse"-isms including "reverse racism," "reverse sexism," and "cisphobia" are not acceptable.
4.
Reporting Violations and Supporting the Code
If you are concerned about your immediate safety, contact
local
emergency services
. For a face-to-face event you may need to contact
venue staff for assistance contacting emergency services.
In most instances if you have an issue with someone’s behavior along
the lines of this Code then please raise it; there are a few potential
people you could raise it to depending on your situation and your
safety.
In most cases, issues are best resolved at the source. Accordingly,
raising the issue with the group chair or team contact of the relevant
group is usually the best first place to raise an issue. Group chairs
and team contacts also have more of the context which helps them
address the issue.
You are welcome to raise issues directly with the
Ombudspeople
as a
group
or
individually
. All
complaints will be taken seriously and will receive a response.
If you are responsible for a community within
W3C
such as in the
role of a chair of a working group and you witness
harassment
or
any other behavior which goes against this Code you are encouraged to
address the issue directly. If you need assistance, you might get
assistance from an Ombudsperson or senior
W3C
management.
Chairs, Team Contacts, and Event Organizers should take such immediate
action as they deem necessary in order to stop
unacceptable behavior
. This action may take
many forms, but examples may include:
4.1
Immediately
Pointing out if someone is violating the Code of Conduct to give them the
chance to withdraw or edit their statement.
Reminding
participants
that meetings and work operate
under the Code.
Asking someone to leave a meeting or a conversation thread.
4.2
After the Meeting
Following up with affected participants, possibly in separate
meetings.
Reaching out to an Ombudsperson for assistance.
Further information and resources for Chairs are available via
the Chairs Training program.
Note
that the action must be directly related to
stopping harm, and must be proportionate. People affected may request
an Ombudsperson consider whether such actions are unacceptable
under the terms of this Code.
You can read more in the
PWETF Procedures
document.
5.
If You've Done Something Improper
As we engage in diverse communities we may accidentally cause offense,
whether through using unknowingly offensive terminology or through
missing social cues.
If you realize (or are told) that you have offended someone then take
the appropriate steps:
Acknowledge that you've done something improper.
Briefly apologize. Don't try to explain yourself or minimize the
issue.
If possible, edit your message, restate your communication in a
better way or withdraw your statement. Publicly revising your statement
helps define the culture for others.
For example:
Alice: “Yeah I used X and it was really crazy!”
Eve: “Hey, could you not use that word? What about ‘ridiculous’ instead?”
Alice: “oh sorry, sure.”
Alice edits message to say “Yeah I used X and it was really confusing!”
This will allow conversation to quickly continue without any need of
further action or escalating the situation.
If you don't understand what you did wrong, assume that the hurt party
has good cause and accept it. We cannot know everyone's background and
should do our best to avoid harm. You are welcome to discuss it with a
W3C
ombudsperson
later.
6.
Glossary
Acceptable Behavior
Within
W3C
, this is behavior which abides by this Code of
Conduct.
Bullying, Workplace Bullying
A tendency of individuals or groups to use persistent aggressive
or unreasonable behavior (e.g., verbal or written abuse, offensive
conduct or any interference which undermines or impedes work)
against a co-worker or any professional relations.
Cisgender/cis person
A person whose
gender identity
matches the one they were
assigned at birth.
Cissexism
The belief or assumption that
cis people
's gender
identities, expressions, and embodiments are more natural and
legitimate than those of trans people. The term is related to
transphobia
Consent
Consent
occurs when one person voluntarily agrees to the
proposal or desires of another. It is a term of common speech, with
specific definitions as used in such fields as the law, medicine,
research, and sexual relationships.
Wikipedia
Deadnaming
is using someone's name after they have changed it. Often a
person's name is not their "legal" name, whatever that may mean.
If someone asks you to use a name for them you should use it. This
includes:
A trans person, who has changed their name when transitioning
Someone who has changed their name through marriage
Someone who has changed their name for any other reason
Demeaning behavior
Acting in a way that reduces another person's dignity, sense of
self-worth, or respect within the community.
Discrimination
The prejudicial treatment of an individual based on criteria
such as: physical appearance, race, ethnic origin, genetic
differences, national or social origin, name, religion, gender,
sexual orientation, family or health situation, pregnancy,
disability, age, education, wealth, domicile,
morals, employment, or union activity.
Diversity
Diversity is variation across a wide range of identities, lived experiences, abilities, and perspectives.
This can include, but is not limited to: socio-economic status, sexual orientation, religion, race, racial identity, physical appearance, neurotype, nationality, mental health, language,
indigeneity
, immigration status, gender, gender identity and gender expression, ethnicity, disability (both visible and invisible), caste, body, or age.
Gender Expression
Gender expression is a person's behavior, mannerisms, interests,
and appearance that are associated with gender in a particular
cultural context.
Wikipedia
Gender Identity
Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Gender
identity can correlate with assigned sex at birth or can differ
from it.
Wikipedia
Harassment
Any conduct, verbal or physical, that has the intent or effect
of interfering with an individual, or that creates an intimidating,
hostile, or offensive environment.
Inclusivity
The practice or policy of including people who might otherwise
be excluded or marginalized.
Insulting behavior
Treating another person with scorn or disrespect.
Marginalized Communities
Communities which are often overlooked, ignored or denigrated
to the detriment of the members of that community. People may often
be part of multiple communities such as being queer and disabled.
Mental Health
A person’s condition with regard to their psychological and
emotional well-being.
Microaggression
Microaggression refers to commonplace verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative prejudicial slights and insults toward any group, especially culturally marginalized groups.
Adapted from Wikipedia
Misgendering
Misgendering is addressing someone using gendered words to imply or
state they are a different gender than the one they have asked
to be used.
Examples include refusing to use their correct pronouns such as
he/him, she/her, they/them or others.
Neurotype
A type of brain, in terms of how a person interprets and responds
to social cues.
Ombudsperson
One who assists individuals and groups in the resolution of
conflicts or concerns. They are a designated neutral who is
appointed or employed by
W3C
to facilitate the informal
resolution of concerns of
participants
within
W3C
Participant
Includes the following persons:
W3C
Team (employees, contractors,
Fellows
W3C
group participants (member representatives and invited experts)
Advisory Committee Representatives (and their guests)
Anyone from the Public partaking in the
W3C
work environment
(e.g., commenting on our specs, emailing us, attending our
conferences or functions, etc.)
Patronizing
Language or behavior that may appear kind or helpful but conveys a feeling of superiority or condescension.
Adapted from the Oxford Languages Dictionary.
Prejudice
Prejudice refers to a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about such things as race, culture, religion, skin color, age, sexual orientation, gender, disability, or gender expression.
Racism
Racism is where racial prejudices work to enhance existing power
imbalances within communities to further marginalize groups based
upon race.
Sexism
Prejudice or
discrimination
based on sex or perceived sex.
Usually against women or non-binary people.
Sexism is where these prejudices work to enhance existing power
imbalances within communities to further marginalize groups.
Sexual harassment
Includes requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical
conduct of a sexual nature, where:
submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly
a term or condition of an individual's employment
submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used
as a basis for employment decisions affecting the individual
such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering
with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating
hostile or offensive working environment
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation relates to the gender(s) a person may be
attracted to in relation to their own gender.
Socio-economic status
Socio-economic status is the combined effects relating to someone’s
wealth, social position/class and property ownership.
Transphobia
Transphobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes, feelings, or
actions toward transgender or transsexual people, or toward
transsexuality. Transphobia can include fear, aversion, hatred,
violence, anger, or discomfort felt or expressed toward people who
do not conform to society's gender expectation.
Unwelcome sexual advance
Includes visual displays of degrading sexual images, sexually suggestive conduct, offensive remarks of a sexual nature, requests for sexual favors, unwelcome physical contact, and sexual assault.
7.
Attribution
Large portions of the text for this policy were taken from the
following resources:
W3C
Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct 2014
Geek Feminism Community anti-harassment/Policy
8.
Change Log
6-Oct-2023: Revised the new definition for diversity based on the discussion in issue
#342
, and added a dictionary reference for the definition of "indigeneity". See
PR #345
15-Aug-2023: Refined the wording of the section on physical contact, based on the suggestions made in issues
#321
and
#322
. See
PR #330
15-Aug-2023: Refined the wording of the Safety vs Comfort section as suggested in
issue #309
. See
PR #329
27-Jun-2023: Fixed markup issues relating to Respec, added Wendy Reid as an editor to the document. See
PR #301
20-Jun-2023: Restored an example from the Patronizing Language section that was previously removed. See
PR #300
20-Jun-2023: Revised the definition for
Microaggression
in the Glossary. See
PR #299
30-May-2023: Changed the name of the CEPC to Code of Conduct. See
PR #297
PR #288
, and
PR #245
16-May-2023: Edited the
Abstract
to better reflect the goals and content of the Code of Conduct. See
PR #292
16-May-2023: Changed the unordered lists to numbered ones. See
PR #291
and
issue #259
16-May-2023: Revise the section on safety vs comfort for clarity. See
PR #290
and
PR #251
16-May-2023: Added editorial recommendations from three issues (
#260
#261
, and
#262
), regarding wording and structure for some points in the behavior sections. See
PR #287
8-May-2023: Added text outlining the goal of the Code of Conduct to address
issue #250
. See
PR #258
25-Apr-2023: Revised section on patronizing language for clarity and better understanding. See
PR #237
and
issue #232
28-Mar-2023: Minor editorial changes regarding wording in the abstract and statement of intent. See
PR #236
21-Mar-2023: Added a section to the document outlining the update process PWE will follow for the Code of Conduct. See
PR #207
8-Nov-2022: Update definition of
diversity
based on the language change from 27-Sep-2022. See
PR #214
27-Sep-2022: Adjust the order and content of identity characteristics mentioned in the Code of Conduct. See
PR #209
27-Sep-2022: Changed the language for the behavior on threats from "physical threats". See
PR #206
27-Sep-2022: Add "personal attacks" as an unacceptable behavior. See
PR #184
30-Aug-2022: Change the word "member" to "participant". See
PR #208
7-Jun-2022: Added "deliberate misinformation" as an unacceptable behavior. See
PR #201
8-Jun-2021: Expand text for "sustained disruption of discussion" to explicitly call out concern trolling, sealioning, gish galloping, and argumentum ad nauseum. See
PR #171
, with glossary links added on 27-Jun-2021 by
PR #172
16-Feb-2021: Amend definition of Discrimination in the glossary. See
PR #163
9.
Acknowledgements
We'd like to acknowledge the efforts of the editors of the 2020 revision of the CEPC, Ada Rose Cannon, An Qi Li, and Tzviya Siegman, whose work got us to the revision we use today. Editing a code of conduct is a challenging task, and their insight and leadership is evident in the quality of the document we continue to work on today.
The following people contributed to the development of this Code:
Ann Bassetti (
W3C
Invited Expert)
Dan Appelquist (
W3C
Invited Expert)
David Booth (
W3C
Invited Expert)
Judy Brewer (
W3C
Jory Burson (OpenJS Foundation)
Nick Doty (Center for Democracy and Technology)
Annette Greiner (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)
Amy van der Hiel (
W3C
Barbara Hochgesang (Intel Corporation)
JaEun Jemma Ku (University of Illinois)
Vlad Levantovsky
Liz Lutgendorff (HM Government)
Nigel Megitt (BBC)
Coralie Mercier (
W3C
Sheila Moussavi (Bocoup)
Charles Nevile (ConsenSys)
Theresa O'Connor (Apple Inc.)
Wendy Reid (Rakuten Group, Inc.)
Cybele Sack (
W3C
Invited Expert)
Wendy Seltzer (
W3C
Tzviya Siegman (Wiley)
Jeanne F Spellman (Tetralogical)
Jennifer Strickland (MITRE Corporation)
Ralph Swick (
W3C
Léonie Watson (Tetralogical)
Chris Wilson (Google LLC)
Jeffrey Yasskin (Google LLC)
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
(2)
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 1. Introduction
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.3 Safety versus Comfort
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
(2)
(3)
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.1 Expected Behavior
§ 8. Change Log
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
(2)
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 1. Introduction
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
(2)
(3)
§ 4. Reporting Violations and Supporting the Code
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.1 Expected Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 2. Statement of Intent
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
§ 8. Change Log
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 4. Reporting Violations and Supporting the Code
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 1. Introduction
(2)
§ 2. Statement of Intent
§ 3.1 Expected Behavior
(2)
§ 4.1 Immediately
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.1 Expected Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.3 Safety versus Comfort
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.3 Safety versus Comfort
Permalink
Referenced in:
Not referenced in this document.
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 6. Glossary
Permalink
Referenced in:
§ 3.1 Expected Behavior
§ 3.2 Unacceptable Behavior