PR sagemath#37501: combine CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md and HANDLING_VIOLATIONS…

….md into

a single file.

CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
 # Code of Conduct #
 
+This document has two parts: the current one --- the Code of Conduct
+itself --- and a second part describing the role of and procedures for
+the Sage Code of Conduct Committee.
+
 This Code was approved by the Sage community by a vote which ended on
 November 24, 2014.
 
@@ -156,7 +160,8 @@ goal will be to respond within 72 hours.
 
 Potential consequences for violating the Sage Code of Conduct include:
 
-- Nothing (if the committee determines that no violation occurred)
+- Nothing (for example if the matter has been resolved publicly while
+  the committee was considering responses)
 - Private feedback or reprimand to the individual(s) involved
 - Warning the person to cease their behavior and that any further
   reports will result in sanctions
@@ -189,18 +194,263 @@ Google groups:
 - [Content policy](https://support.google.com/groups/answer/4561696)
 - [Reporting procedures](https://support.google.com/groups/answer/81275)
 
-## Amending this document ##
+## Amending the Code of Conduct ##
+
+The first part of this document may be amended by a vote of the Sage
+community in the sage-devel Google group, with the exception of facts
+like the membership of the Sage Code of Conduct Committee, changes to
+URLs, or changes to email addresses: changes like that can be done via
+a normal pull request. Any pull requests involving this document
+should list the committee members as reviewers.
+
+
+
+# Guide for the Sage Code of Conduct Committee #
+
+## Introduction ##
+
+This is the manual followed by the Sage Code of Conduct Committee. It is used
+when we respond to an issue to make sure we’re consistent and fair.
+
+Enforcing the Code of Conduct impacts our community today and for the
+future. It’s an action that we do not take lightly. When reviewing
+enforcement measures, the Sage Code of Conduct Committee will keep the
+following values and guidelines in mind:
+
+- Act in a personal manner rather than impersonal. The committee can
+  engage the parties to understand the situation, while respecting the
+  privacy and any necessary confidentiality of reporters. However,
+  it is sometimes necessary to communicate with one or more
+  individuals directly: the committee’s goal is to improve the health
+  of our community rather than only produce a formal decision.
+
+- Emphasize empathy for individuals rather than judging behavior,
+  avoiding binary labels of “good” and “bad/evil”. Overt, clear-cut
+  aggression and harassment exists and we will address that
+  firmly. But many scenarios that can prove challenging to resolve are
+  those where normal disagreements devolve into unhelpful or harmful
+  behavior from multiple parties. Understanding the full context and
+  finding a path that re-engages all is hard, but ultimately the most
+  productive for our community.
+
+- We understand that email is a difficult medium and can be
+  isolating. Receiving criticism over email, without personal contact,
+  can be particularly painful. This makes it especially important to
+  keep an atmosphere of open-minded respect of the views of others. It
+  also means that we must be transparent in our actions, and that we
+  will do everything in our power to make sure that all our members
+  are treated fairly and with sympathy.
+
+- Discrimination can be subtle and it can be unconscious. It can show
+  itself as unfairness and hostility in otherwise ordinary
+  interactions. We know that this does occur, and we will take care to
+  look out for it. We would very much like to hear from you if you
+  feel you have been treated unfairly, and we will use these
+  procedures to make sure that your complaint is heard and addressed.
+
+- Help increase engagement in good discussion practice: try to
+  identify where discussion may have broken down and provide
+  actionable information, pointers and resources that can lead to
+  positive change on these points.
+
+- Be mindful of the needs of new members: provide them with explicit
+  support and consideration, with the aim of increasing participation
+  from underrepresented groups in particular.
+
+Individuals come from different cultural backgrounds and native
+languages. Try to identify any honest misunderstandings caused by a
+non-native speaker and help them understand the issue and what they
+can change to avoid causing offense. Complex discussion in a foreign
+language can be very intimidating, and we want to grow our diversity
+also across nationalities and cultures.
+
+Mediation: voluntary, informal mediation is a tool at our disposal. In
+some contexts, such as when two or more parties have escalated to the
+point of inappropriate behavior (something sadly common in human
+conflict), it may be useful to facilitate a mediation process. This is
+only an example: the committee can consider mediation in any case,
+mindful that the process is meant to be strictly voluntary and no
+party can be pressured to participate. If the committee suggests
+mediation, it should:
+
+- Find a candidate who can serve as a mediator.
+
+- Obtain the agreement of the reporter(s). The reporter(s) have
+  complete freedom to decline the mediation idea, or to propose an
+  alternate mediator.
+
+- Obtain the agreement of the reported person(s).
+
+- Settle on the mediator: while parties can propose a different
+  mediator than the suggested candidate, only if common agreement is
+  reached on all terms can the process move forward.
+
+- Establish a timeline for mediation to complete, ideally within two weeks.
+
+The mediator will engage with all the parties and seek a resolution
+that is satisfactory to all. Upon completion, the mediator will
+provide a report (vetted by all parties to the process) to the
+committee, with recommendations on further steps. The committee will
+then evaluate these results (whether satisfactory resolution was
+achieved or not) and decide on any additional action deemed necessary.
+
+## How the committee will respond to reports ##
+
+When the committee (or a committee member) receives a report, they
+will first determine whether the report is about a clear and severe
+breach (as defined below). If so, immediate action needs to be taken
+in addition to the regular report-handling process.
+
+### Clear and severe breach actions ###
+
+We know that it is painfully common for internet communication to
+start at or devolve into obvious and flagrant abuse. We will deal
+quickly with clear and severe breaches like personal threats, violent,
+sexist, or racist language.
+
+When a member of the Sage Code of Conduct Committee becomes aware of a
+clear and severe breach, they will do the following:
+
+- Immediately disconnect the originator from all Sage communication channels.
+
+- Reply to the reporter that their report has been received and that
+  the originator has been disconnected.
+
+- In every case, the moderator should make a reasonable effort to
+  contact the originator, and tell them specifically how their
+  language or actions qualify as a “clear and severe breach”. The
+  moderator should also say that, if the originator believes this is
+  unfair or they want to be reconnected to Sage, they have the right
+  to ask for a review, as below, by the Sage Code of Conduct Committee. The
+  moderator should copy this explanation to the Sage Code of Conduct
+  Committee.
+
+The Sage Code of Conduct Committee will formally review and sign off on all
+cases where this mechanism has been applied to make sure it is not
+being used to control ordinary heated disagreement.
+
+### Report handling ###
+
+When a report is sent to the committee, they will immediately reply to
+the reporter to confirm receipt. This reply must be sent within 72
+hours, and the group should strive to respond much quicker than that.
+
+If a report doesn’t contain enough information, the committee will
+obtain all relevant data before acting. The committee is empowered to
+contact any individuals involved to get a more complete account of
+events.
+
+The committee will then review the incident and determine, to the best of their ability:
+
+- What happened.
+
+- Whether this event constitutes a Code of Conduct violation.
+
+- Who are the responsible party/parties.
+
+- Whether this is an ongoing situation, and whether there is a threat to anyone’s physical safety.
+
+This information will be collected in writing, and whenever possible
+the group’s deliberations will be recorded and retained (i.e., chat
+transcripts, email discussions, recorded conference calls, summaries
+of voice conversations, etc.).
 
-This document may be amended by a vote of the Sage community in the
-sage-devel Google group, with the exception of facts like the
-membership of the Sage Code of Conduct Committee, changes to URLs, or
-changes to email addresses: changes like that can be done via a normal
-pull request. Any pull requests involving this document should list
-the committee members as reviewers.
+It is important to retain an archive of all activities of this
+committee to ensure consistency in behavior and provide institutional
+memory for the project. To assist in this, the default channel of
+discussion for this committee will be a private mailing list
+accessible to current and future members of the committee. If the
+committee finds the need to use off-list communications (e.g., phone
+calls for early/rapid response), it should, in all cases, summarize
+these back to the list so there’s a good record of the process.
+
+The Sage Code of Conduct Committee should aim to have a resolution agreed upon
+within two weeks. In the event that a resolution can’t be determined
+in that time, the committee will respond to the reporter(s) with an
+update and projected timeline for the resolution.
+
+## Resolutions ##
+
+The committee must agree on a resolution by consensus. If the group
+cannot reach consensus and deadlocks for over a week, the committee is
+empowered to consult as needed to try to reach consensus.
+
+Possible responses may include:
+
+- Taking no further action:
+
+  - if we determine no violations have occurred.
+
+  - if the matter has been resolved publicly while the committee was considering responses.
+
+- Coordinating voluntary mediation: if all involved parties agree, the
+  committee may facilitate a mediation process as detailed above.
+
+- Remind publicly, and point out that some behavior/actions/language
+  have been judged inappropriate and why in the current context, or
+  can but hurtful to some people, requesting the community to
+  self-adjust.
+
+- A private reprimand from the committee to the individual(s)
+  involved. In this case, a representative of the committee will
+  deliver that reprimand to the individual(s) over email, cc’ing the
+  group.
+
+- A public reprimand. In this case, a committee representative will deliver
+  that reprimand in the same venue that the violation occurred, within
+  the limits of practicality. E.g., the original mailing list for an
+  email violation, but for a chat room discussion where the
+  person/context may be gone, they can be reached by other means. The
+  group may choose to publish this message elsewhere for documentation
+  purposes.
+
+- A request for a public or private apology, assuming the reporter
+  agrees to this idea: they may, at their discretion, refuse further
+  contact with the violator. A committee representative will deliver
+  this request. The committee may, if it chooses, attach “strings” to
+  this request: for example, the group may ask a violator to
+  apologize, in order to retain one’s membership on a mailing list.
+
+- A “mutually agreed upon hiatus” where the committee asks the
+  individual to temporarily refrain from community participation. If
+  the individual chooses not to take a temporary break voluntarily,
+  the committee may issue a “mandatory cooling off period”.
+
+- A permanent or temporary ban from some or all Sage spaces (mailing
+  lists, GitHub, etc.). The group will maintain records of all such
+  bans so that they may be reviewed in the future or otherwise
+  maintained.
+
+Once a resolution is agreed upon, the committee will contact the
+original reporter and any other affected parties and explain that the
+committee has taken action. Depending on the situation, the committee
+may or may not choose to provide further details about what actions
+were taken and how they might affect the reporter.
+
+The committee will never publicly discuss the issue; all public
+statements will be made by a representative of the Sage Code of Conduct
+Committee.
+
+## Conflicts of interest ##
+
+In the event of any conflict of interest, a committee member must
+immediately notify the other members, and recuse themselves if
+necessary.
+
+## Amending the Code of Conduct Committee manual ##
+
+This part of the document may be amended by a vote of the Sage Code of
+Conduct Committee.
+
+## Credits ##
 
 ## Credits ##
 
-Portions of this are adapted from the [SciPy code of
+Portions of the first part (the code itself) are adapted from the
+[SciPy code of
 conduct](https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/dev/conduct/code_of_conduct.html)
 and the [NumFOCUS code of
-conduct](https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct).
+conduct](https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct).  The second part (the
+guide for the Sage Code of Conduct Committee) is largely adapted from
+the [SciPy report handling
+manual](https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/dev/conduct/report_handling_manual.html).