Update and refactor CoC policy and processes

[tobie]

• Clearly split all CoC related-documents into 4 buckets:
  1. The Code of Conduct itself, which is also the source of truth for the makeup of the CoC Team, how to contact the CoC Team, and how to report an incident, escalate it, and appeal a decision.
  2. The Code of Conduct Policy, which defines the higher level aspects of our code of conduct implementation (the what).
  3. The CoC Team Charter which is the mean by which the CPC delegates responsibilities to the CoC Team.
  4. Various related processes which describe how the policy is implemented.
• Replace the Code of Conduct Panel with a Code of Conduct Team instead.
• Standardize on the language used in the Contributor Covenant and in the CNCF and use it consistently throughout.
• Clarify the escalation and appeal policies.
• Be explicit about the projects's freedom to implement moderation policies
• Create a placeholder for all of the processes related to the makeup and structure of the CoC Team.
• Add an indication at the top of each related file pointing people who just want to report an incident to the right place.
• Clean up a number of smaller issues.
• Clarify the requirements for projects who opt-in to manage incident reports themselves. Make the policy generic so that it applies both to those projects and to the CoC. Partially addresses Clarify requirements around CoC violation #786.

Still to do:

• Decide whether it is better to separate report@, coc-escalation@, and coc-appeal@ or just use report@ for all the things. Decided to use just one email: [email protected]
  • Add or remove email lists accordingly
  • Update the CoC accordingly.
• Add the CoC Team Charter (and in particular clarify the makeup and selection process of the CoC Team) (@PaulaPaul).
• Should the privacy policy also protect the accused person, and if so, what are the necessary exceptions?
• Reach out to projects who would be affected by these changes (tracking in Update onboarding and post-graduation checklists to match new CoC policy #1255).
• Address concerns raised by @bnb:
  • There's no clear definition of conflict of interest. Agreement that we need a conflict of interest policy, but can we land this PR without it? (Link to comment)
  • What constitutes report mishandling needs to be defined more clearly. (Link to comment)
  • The escalation and appeal policy described in this PR allow the CoC Team to reverse decisions made at the project level in certain fairly scoped situations. There isn't consensus about this. (Link to comment)
  • The current policy delegates defining case handling processes to the CoC Team. There isn't consensus about this. (Link to comment)
  • There isn't consensus that having a CoC Chair is useful. (Link to comment)
  • There isn't consensus about eligibility criteria. (Link to comment)

This is now ready to land pending:

• @bnb to confirm they're no longer blocking (commenting didn't remove the block) (marked as done as we can work around the technical issue)
• @eemeli to confirm he's happy with the provisions around confidentiality of accused individuals
• agreement to remove obsolete incident management process and reference it by a link to versioned content

[mcollina]

lgtm

[tobie]

Thank for your thorough review, @eemeli. I think I've answered or addressed the issues you raised. I've now marked them as resolved. Feel free to LMK if you disagree with my responses. Thanks again for chiming in. Much appreciated!

[ljharb]

Seems like this PR removed this page: https://github.com/openjs-foundation/cross-project-council/blob/0c30a269acb2cc0b22cf3c62b8389e779bda0101~1/conduct/FOUNDATION_CODE_OF_CONDUCT_REQUIREMENTS.md but the link still exists somewhere, so the link checker is failing

[tobie]

Must have missed this one which is in meeting minutes:

cross-project-council/meetings/2019/2019-04-01.md

Line 32 in 2070ca3

* From: https://github.com/openjs-foundation/cross-project-council/blob/HEAD/conduct/FOUNDATION_CODE_OF_CONDUCT_REQUIREMENTS.md we’d need [email protected] and [email protected]

It's kind of weird to be editing minutes years later for this, tbh.

[ljharb]

true, but cool URLs don't change, so the alternative is never fully removing any markdown files :-)