Post Status Confirms New Community Code of Conduct
[[3. Resources/Readwise/Full Document Contents/Articles/Post Status Confirms New Community Code of Conduct|Full Document Contents]]
## Document Notes
---
tags:
- #CodeOfConduct
- #CommunityGuidelines
- #WordPress
Author: Post Status Team (reported by Michelle Frechette)
Source: Post Status Website
Reference: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
date created: 2025-08-23 00:00
---
# Title: Post Status Confirms New Community Code of Conduct
## Table of Contents:
- [[#📝 Summary:]]
- [[#📖 Main Content:]]
- [[#🗒️ Notes]]
- [[#📖 References:]]
- [[#🗣️ Paraphrase:]]
- [[#📰 Newsletter:]]
- [[#✅ Action Items:]]
- [[#🔗 🧪 Hypotheses]]
- [[#🔗 📊 Methodology]]
- [[#🔗 ❓ Questions]]
- [[#🔗 🔮 Future Research]]
- [[#🔗 💡 Implications]]
- [[#🔗 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment]]
- [[#🔗 📊 Accessibility Assessment]]
- [[#🔗 🌍 DEIB Assessment]]
- [[#🔗 ✅ Logical validity]]
- [[#🔗 🔍 DARVO Analysis]]
- [[#🔗 🔍 SEO Evaluation]]
- [[#🔗 🎯 Conclusion]]
### References:
- Open Source Bridge Code of Conduct: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/ (archive)
## 📝 Summary:
Post Status has adopted a Community Code of Conduct, drawing heavily from the WordPress/WordCamp and Open Source Bridge codes, to ensure a friendly, safe, and inclusive environment across its Slack and events. It defines purpose, expected behavior, unacceptable behavior, enforcement procedures, reporting pathways, scope, and attribution under Creative Commons.
Notable quotes:
- “Post Status is committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all…”
- “Unacceptable behavior will not be tolerated… administrators may take any action they deem appropriate, up to and including expulsion…”
## 📖 Main Content:
The article introduces a codified standard for conduct across the Post Status community. It emphasizes proactive community care, clear expectations, and transparent enforcement to maintain psychological safety. It specifies harassment definitions, reporting channels, and the authority of administrators (Cory Miller, Lindsey Miller, and Michelle Frechette). The code is adapted with attribution to Open Source Bridge and reflects WordPress/WordCamp practices.
Key connections:
- Aligns with OSS community norms of inclusivity and contributor safety.
- Encourages bystander intervention and prompt reporting.
- Leverages a permissive license to reuse a proven policy framework.
### 🗒️ Notes
- Purpose
- Commitment to friendly, safe, welcoming environment regardless of identity or preferences.
- Clarifies expectations and consequences.
- Invites all participants to contribute to safety and positivity.
- Expected Behavior
- Be considerate, respectful, collaborative.
- Avoid demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing speech/behavior.
- Be mindful; report dangerous or distressing situations.
- Participate authentically and actively.
- Unacceptable Behavior
- Intimidation, harassment, abuse, discrimination, derogatory or demeaning conduct in Slack and at events.
- Harassment includes: offensive comments re: gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability; inappropriate nudity/sexual images (including Slack DMs); intimidation, stalking, harassing photography/recording, sustained disruption, inappropriate physical contact, unwelcome sexual attention.
- Consequences and Enforcement
- Zero tolerance in community spaces.
- Immediate compliance required upon request to stop.
- Admins may take any appropriate action including expulsion without warning or refund.
- Support offered: contacting security/law enforcement, escorts, consultation to ensure safety in Slack and events.
- Reporting
- Encourages notifying administrators promptly for any concerns or observed violations.
- Scope
- Applies to all participants: sponsors, volunteers, speakers, attendees, and Slack members (implied by context).
- Contact Information
- Administrators: Cory Miller, Lindsey Miller, Michelle Frechette; contact via Slack DMs or general contact form.
- License and Attribution
- Directly adapted from Open Source Bridge; released under CC BY-SA.
## 📖 References:
- Post Status Community Code of Conduct: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
- Open Source Bridge Code of Conduct: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/ (archive)
- WordPress/WordCamp Code of Conduct (contextual inspiration): https://make.wordpress.org/community/handbook/wordcamp-organizer/planning-details/code-of-conduct/
## 🗣️ Paraphrase:
- Original idea: “Post Status is committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all… This code of conduct outlines our expectations… We invite all participants to help us realize a safe and positive experience for everyone.”
- Paraphrase: Post Status pledges to maintain an inclusive, secure community space. The code clearly states behavioral standards and consequences. Everyone is encouraged to take part in creating a supportive, positive environment.
- Original idea: “If a participant engages in unacceptable behavior, the Post Status administrators may take any action they deem appropriate, up to and including expulsion… without warning or refund.”
- Paraphrase: When violations occur, administrators have full discretion to act, which may include immediate removal from Slack or events, and such actions can be taken without prior notice or reimbursement.
## 📰 Newsletter:
This week in WordPress: Learning, Community, and Care
- Learn web development: Brush up on fundamentals with modern PHP, JS, and Git workflows. If you’re mentoring newcomers, consider pairing GitHub Issues with project-based learning to make contributions stick.
- Community update: Post Status has confirmed a new Community Code of Conduct to keep our Slack and events welcoming and safe. It clarifies expected behavior, defines harassment (including DMs), and details swift enforcement and reporting pathways. Read the code for practical guidance on bystander intervention and reporting. See: Post Status Community Code of Conduct.
- Highlights: Shoutout to community moderators and event organizers who do the invisible safety work. If you see something, say something—early reports prevent bigger problems.
- New plugins: Keep an eye on accessibility-focused plugins and moderation helpers for community sites—tools that add reporting buttons, anonymize reporter data, and log moderation actions can reinforce your code of conduct in practice.
- Pro tip: Add a Code of Conduct link to your repo README and event pages; use GitHub issue templates for incident reporting and triage.
Links:
- Post Status Community Code of Conduct: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
- Open Source Bridge attribution: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/
Tone: Friendly, professional, lightly humorous, and useful—just how we like it.
## ✅ Action Items:
A tailored prompt for aligning any article to your Developer Advocate/OSPO trajectory:
“Analyze the provided article with respect to:
- Open-source advocacy: Identify how the piece promotes open participation, transparency, licensing, and community health. Map any policies or practices to OSPO pillars (governance, compliance, community, value).
- Contributor engagement: Extract tactics that welcome, retain, and protect contributors (onboarding, mentorship, recognition, CoC enforcement, conflict resolution). Propose measurable experiments to improve engagement (e.g., first-issue time-to-PR, retention rates).
- Education and enablement: Translate core ideas into workshops, talks, docs, and curricula for PHP/JS/HTML/CSS/Git/GitHub learners. Include stepwise learning paths and hands-on exercises.
- Sustainable funding and stewardship: Note how the article intersects with sustainability (moderation costs, training, tooling). Suggest funding or sponsorship models aligned with WordPress ecosystem norms.
- OSPO readiness: Explain how insights inform policies you’d champion as an OSPO director (incident response runboo
> [!note]+ Document Notes
> tags:
> - #CodeOfConduct
> - #CommunityGuidelines
> - #WordPress
> Author: Post Status Team (reported by Michelle Frechette)
> Source: Post Status Website
> Reference: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
> date created: 2025-08-23 00:00
>
> # Title: Post Status Confirms New Community Code of Conduct
>
<!-- deep-read:sections start -->
## Table of Contents:
- 🔗 [📝 Summary](#-summary)
- 🔗 [📖 Main Content](#-main-content)
- 🔗 [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes)
- 🔗 [📖 References](#-references)
- 🔗 [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase)
- 🔗 [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter)
- 🔗 [✅ Action Items](#-action-items)
- 🔗 [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses)
- 🔗 [📊 Methodology](#-methodology)
- 🔗 [❓ Questions](#-questions)
- 🔗 [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research)
- 🔗 [💡 Implications](#-implications)
- 🔗 [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment)
- 🔗 [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment)
- 🔗 [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment)
- 🔗 [✅ Logical validity](#-logical-validity)
- 🔗 [🔍 DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis)
- 🔗 [🔍 SEO Evaluation](#-seo-evaluation)
- 🔗 [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion)
### References:
- Open Source Bridge Code of Conduct: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/ (archive)
## 📝 Summary:
Post Status has adopted a Community Code of Conduct, drawing heavily from the WordPress/WordCamp and Open Source Bridge codes, to ensure a friendly, safe, and inclusive environment across its Slack and events. It defines purpose, expected behavior, unacceptable behavior, enforcement procedures, reporting pathways, scope, and attribution under Creative Commons.
Notable quotes:
- “Post Status is committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all…”
- “Unacceptable behavior will not be tolerated… administrators may take any action they deem appropriate, up to and including expulsion…”
## 📖 Main Content:
The article introduces a codified standard for conduct across the Post Status community. It emphasizes proactive community care, clear expectations, and transparent enforcement to maintain psychological safety. It specifies harassment definitions, reporting channels, and the authority of administrators (Cory Miller, Lindsey Miller, and Michelle Frechette). The code is adapted with attribution to Open Source Bridge and reflects WordPress/WordCamp practices.
Key connections:
- Aligns with OSS community norms of inclusivity and contributor safety.
- Encourages bystander intervention and prompt reporting.
- Leverages a permissive license to reuse a proven policy framework.
### 🗒️ Notes
- Purpose
- Commitment to friendly, safe, welcoming environment regardless of identity or preferences.
- Clarifies expectations and consequences.
- Invites all participants to contribute to safety and positivity.
- Expected Behavior
- Be considerate, respectful, collaborative.
- Avoid demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing speech/behavior.
- Be mindful; report dangerous or distressing situations.
- Participate authentically and actively.
- Unacceptable Behavior
- Intimidation, harassment, abuse, discrimination, derogatory or demeaning conduct in Slack and at events.
- Harassment includes: offensive comments re: gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability; inappropriate nudity/sexual images (including Slack DMs); intimidation, stalking, harassing photography/recording, sustained disruption, inappropriate physical contact, unwelcome sexual attention.
- Consequences and Enforcement
- Zero tolerance in community spaces.
- Immediate compliance required upon request to stop.
- Admins may take any appropriate action including expulsion without warning or refund.
- Support offered: contacting security/law enforcement, escorts, consultation to ensure safety in Slack and events.
- Reporting
- Encourages notifying administrators promptly for any concerns or observed violations.
- Scope
- Applies to all participants: sponsors, volunteers, speakers, attendees, and Slack members (implied by context).
- Contact Information
- Administrators: Cory Miller, Lindsey Miller, Michelle Frechette; contact via Slack DMs or general contact form.
- License and Attribution
- Directly adapted from Open Source Bridge; released under CC BY-SA.
## 📖 References:
- Post Status Community Code of Conduct: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
- Open Source Bridge Code of Conduct: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/ (archive)
- WordPress/WordCamp Code of Conduct (contextual inspiration): https://make.wordpress.org/community/handbook/wordcamp-organizer/planning-details/code-of-conduct/
## 🗣️ Paraphrase:
- Original idea: “Post Status is committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all… This code of conduct outlines our expectations… We invite all participants to help us realize a safe and positive experience for everyone.”
- Paraphrase: Post Status pledges to maintain an inclusive, secure community space. The code clearly states behavioral standards and consequences. Everyone is encouraged to take part in creating a supportive, positive environment.
- Original idea: “If a participant engages in unacceptable behavior, the Post Status administrators may take any action they deem appropriate, up to and including expulsion… without warning or refund.”
- Paraphrase: When violations occur, administrators have full discretion to act, which may include immediate removal from Slack or events, and such actions can be taken without prior notice or reimbursement.
## 📰 Newsletter:
This week in WordPress: Learning, Community, and Care
- Learn web development: Brush up on fundamentals with modern PHP, JS, and Git workflows. If you’re mentoring newcomers, consider pairing GitHub Issues with project-based learning to make contributions stick.
- Community update: Post Status has confirmed a new Community Code of Conduct to keep our Slack and events welcoming and safe. It clarifies expected behavior, defines harassment (including DMs), and details swift enforcement and reporting pathways. Read the code for practical guidance on bystander intervention and reporting. See: Post Status Community Code of Conduct.
- Highlights: Shoutout to community moderators and event organizers who do the invisible safety work. If you see something, say something—early reports prevent bigger problems.
- New plugins: Keep an eye on accessibility-focused plugins and moderation helpers for community sites—tools that add reporting buttons, anonymize reporter data, and log moderation actions can reinforce your code of conduct in practice.
- Pro tip: Add a Code of Conduct link to your repo README and event pages; use GitHub issue templates for incident reporting and triage.
Links:
- Post Status Community Code of Conduct: https://poststatus.com/post-status-confirms-new-community-code-of-conduct/
- Open Source Bridge attribution: http://opensourcebridge.org/about/code-of-conduct/
Tone: Friendly, professional, lightly humorous, and useful—just how we like it.
## ✅ Action Items:
A tailored prompt for aligning any article to your Developer Advocate/OSPO trajectory:
“Analyze the provided article with respect to:
- Open-source advocacy: Identify how the piece promotes open participation, transparency, licensing, and community health. Map any policies or practices to OSPO pillars (governance, compliance, community, value).
- Contributor engagement: Extract tactics that welcome, retain, and protect contributors (onboarding, mentorship, recognition, CoC enforcement, conflict resolution). Propose measurable experiments to improve engagement (e.g., first-issue time-to-PR, retention rates).
- Education and enablement: Translate core ideas into workshops, talks, docs, and curricula for PHP/JS/HTML/CSS/Git/GitHub learners. Include stepwise learning paths and hands-on exercises.
- Sustainable funding and stewardship: Note how the article intersects with sustainability (moderation costs, training, tooling). Suggest funding or sponsorship models aligned with WordPress ecosystem norms.
- OSPO readiness: Explain how insights inform policies you’d champion as an OSPO director (incident response runbooks, reporting workflows, data retention, privacy, DEIB metrics, training modules).
- Transparency and inclusivity: Evaluate DEIB language, accessibility, and psychological safety. Recommend improvements and metrics (incident resolution time, satisfaction surveys).
- On- and off-stage impact: Outline talk abstracts, contributor office hours, and community programs you can run. Provide KPIs and a 90-day implementation roadmap.”
Deliverables: 1-page exec summary, 3 policy recommendations, 2 education artifacts, 1 metrics dashboard spec.
## 🧪 Hypotheses:
- H1: Publishing and consistently enforcing a clear CoC reduces reported incidents per 1,000 participants over 12 months.
- H2: Visible reporting channels (named admins, DMs, forms) increase incident reporting rates in the first quarter post-launch, then stabilize as deterrence improves.
- H3: Bystander intervention prompts in the CoC increase third-party reports and shorten mean time to intervention.
- H4: Explicitly including private communications (e.g., Slack DMs) in harassment definitions reduces boundary violations in private channels.
- H5: Adapting a well-known licensed CoC (Open Source Bridge) accelerates community acceptance and reduces policy ambiguity.
### 📊 Methodology:
- Mixed-methods longitudinal study across Slack and events.
- Data sources: anonymized incident logs, moderation actions, time-to-resolution, community surveys (psychological safety, NPS), onboarding and retention metrics.
- Designs:
- Interrupted time series (pre/post CoC launch).
- Difference-in-differences across comparable communities without new CoCs.
- Thematic analysis of qualitative reports for harassment patterns.
- Analysis: Poisson/negative binomial for incident counts; survival analysis for time-to-resolution; SEM for relationships among safety, engagement, and retention.
### ❓ Questions:
- How does including Slack DMs in the scope change reporting patterns?
- What training most improves bystander intervention effectiveness?
- Which enforcement actions most reduce recidivism?
- How can privacy and transparency be balanced in incident reports?
- What metrics should OSPOs track to prove community safety ROI?
### 🔮 Future Research:
- Comparative efficacy of different CoC enforcement models (restorative vs. punitive).
- Impact of moderator training on community growth and satisfaction.
- Automation opportunities (reporting bots, triage workflows) without chilling effects.
- Cross-cultural adaptations of CoCs for global communities.
### 💡 Implications:
- Evidence-backed CoC practices can become OSPO policy templates.
- Improved psychological safety likely increases contributor retention and diversity.
- Clear metrics enable sustainable funding cases for moderation and training.
### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment:
- Readability: Plain-language policy; approximately high school to early college reading level.
- Visual learners
- Present: Structured headings and bullet points.
- Improve: Add infographics/flowcharts (e.g., “Report → Triage → Action → Support”).
- Aural learners
- Present: None.
- Improve: Provide audio summary and a short podcast/Q&A on enforcement scenarios.
- Verbal learners
- Present: Clear definitions and examples.
- Improve: Add scenarios, analogies, and links to additional policy resources.
- Physical (Kinesthetic)
- Present: None.
- Improve: Include role-play exercises for moderators/bystanders and incident rehearsal runbooks.
- Logical (Mathematical)
- Present: Stepwise expectations and consequences.
- Improve: Decision trees, severity matrices, KPIs.
- Social (Interpersonal)
- Present: Encourages reporting and collaboration.
- Improve: Facilitate community forums, office hours, and peer-support channels.
- Solitary (Intrapersonal)
- Present: Implied self-reflection on behavior.
- Improve: Add self-checklists and private reflection prompts.
- Naturalistic
- Present: None.
- Improve: Use nature-based metaphors for ecosystem health and balance.
### 📊 Accessibility Assessment:
- Screen reader compatibility: Ensure semantic headings (H1-H3), list markup, and alt text on any images/diagrams added.
- Keyboard navigation: Verify focus states and skip links on web pages hosting the CoC.
- Contrast/readability: Use high-contrast colors and legible fonts; ensure adequate line spacing.
- Text resizing: Confirm responsive design and reflow without layout breakage; support prefers-reduced-motion.
### 🌍 DEIB Assessment:
- Cultural relevance: Broad inclusivity list; could add examples from various regions and contexts.
- Inclusive language: Strong; maintain gender-neutral terms and define jargon.
- Neurodiversity support: Use short paragraphs, bullets, and clear headings; add summaries and checklists.
- Representation: Include scenarios reflecting different identities and roles (volunteers, sponsors, speakers).
- Psychological safety: Strong emphasis; consider content warnings and transparent incident metrics reporting.
### ✅ Logical validity:
- Sound reasoning:
- Clear causal chain: Defined unacceptable behaviors → Enforcement authority → Safer environment.
- Ethical reasoning: Prioritizes safety and dignity for all participants.
- Logical flow: Purpose → Expectations → Prohibitions → Enforcement → Reporting → Support → Attribution.
- Strengths:
- Explicit definitions reduce ambiguity.
- Enforcement clarity deters misconduct.
- Attribution signals transparency and community alignment.
- Areas to enhance:
- Add measurable success criteria (e.g., incident rate targets).
- Include appeals and restorative processes to ensure fairness.
- Provide anonymized case studies for clarity.
- Fallacies: None apparent; avoids emotional manipulation and appeals to authority. Attribution to Open Source Bridge is transparent rather than fallacious.
- Tone of voice: Professional, firm, inclusive, and supportive.
## 🔍 DARVO Analysis:
- Deny: No denial of issues; the policy acknowledges potential harm and explicitly defines harassment. No minimization or dismissal language is present.
- Attack: No attacks on reporters or accusers; instead, it invites reporting and offers support.
- Reverse Victim and Offender: No reframing of offenders as victims; the emphasis remains on the safety of those impacted and community well-being.
- Recurring cues: Language like “will not be tolerated,” “expected to comply immediately,” and “assist those experiencing unacceptable behavior” centers victims and community safety, counter to DARVO tactics.
- Emotional cues: Calm, authoritative, empathetic toward those harmed; neutral regarding alleged offenders until action is required.
- Rhetorical tactics: Clear definitions and procedural clarity reduce room for DARVO manipulation by would-be offenders.
### 🔍 SEO Evaluation:
1. Keywords
- Present: “Code of Conduct,” “Post Status,” “community,” “harassment,” “Slack,” “events.”
- Improve: Add long-tail variants like “community code of conduct policy,” “reporting harassment in Slack,” “inclusive community guidelines.”
2. Meta description
- Suggested: “Post Status confirms a Community Code of Conduct defining expected behavior, harassment policies, and enforcement to keep Slack and events safe.”
3. Title tag
- Current is clear; ensure inclusion of “Community Code of Conduct” and fit within 60 characters.
4. Headers
- Use H2/H3 for sections (Purpose, Expected Behavior, Unacceptable Behavior, Enforcement, Reporting, Contacts, License).
5. Content length
- Adequate for policy; could add FAQs/Scenarios for depth and SEO.
6. Internal/External links
- Internal: Link to contact form, Slack guidelines, event pages, privacy policy.
- External: Attribution to Open Source Bridge; optionally link to WordCamp CoC.
7. URL structure
- Ensure concise, keyword-rich slug (e.g., /post-status-community-code-of-conduct).
8. Image optimization
- If adding diagrams, include descriptive alt text and compressed files.
9. Mobile optimization
- Ensure responsive layout and fast load; avoid heavy scripts.
10. User engagement
- Add anchor links, FAQ accordion, “Report an incident” CTA, related articles.
11. Schema markup
- Use Article schema; consider FAQ schema for scenarios.
12. Social sharing
- Include sharing buttons and proper Open Graph/Twitter Card metadata.
## 🎯 Conclusion:
Post Status’s Community Code of Conduct establishes clear expectations, specific definitions of harassment (including private DMs), robust enforcement, and accessible reporting channels, all adapted transparently under a CC BY-SA license. It strengthens psychological safety across Slack and events, aligns with OSS and WordPress community norms, and provides a solid foundation for measurable community health improvements. With added metrics, scenarios, accessibility enhancements, and SEO optimizations, it can serve as a model policy for open-source communities and an OSPO-aligned governance artifact.
<!-- deep-read:sections end -->
## Highlights
- • Be considerate, respectful, and collaborative.
• Refrain from demeaning, discriminatory or harassing behavior and speech.
• Be mindful of your fellow participants. Alert Post Status administrators if you notice a dangerous or unwelcoming situation or someone in distress. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01hbbnzvht0dezpdp2rr6ryedk))
- Unacceptable behaviors include: intimidating, harassing, abusive, discriminatory, derogatory or demeaning conduct by any Post Status participants on Slack or at online or in-person events. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01hbbp0eyn1ajr7w7abrfm53th))