Rewrote some of the recruiting clauses

[notheotherben]

Again, makes it a bit more clear in some cases what is intended as well as leaving some things usable for more than just the Slack chat (if we ever get forums/websites etc. going).

I have a couple of concerns which I think we need to discuss though, namely the following:

• What happens if a developer who is a member of ZA Developers becomes a professional recruiter (or a professional recruiter also moonlights as a developer)? Would it be maybe be a good idea to add a clause under which targeted recruitment without the targeted member's expressed consent is considered harassment and then also add a spam clause?
• Regarding the referral links - what happens if a someone posts a link to a website on which there are adverts present which they receive revenue from? Technically it is monetized however there may be valid content on the page which is the true subject of the message. I think this is something which could be addressed by a spam clause as well.

[kennethkalmer]

On 🔥, thanks so much for these!

So, regarding the first point. If someone moonlights, instant ban. It violates the sanctity of our safe space. But if someone's career path leads them from developer to recruiter, we can only hope they act according to our CoC. Two extremes here are that they stay and play well, so to keep learning and to keep a finger on the pulse; or they simply become inactive and move to a different community (knowing that any violations of our CoC would probably do a lot of damage to their reputation as a recruiter).

Then for the referral links, you're right and I didn't think it through properly. I was more thinking of big links like Toptal & Hired.com, who hugely incentivize developers to refer each other. We could have the wording reflect that someone could alert an admin if the page is spammy and/or a big-bonus referral link.

Spamminess is tricky. We can't riot when someone accidently shares a referral link for say Dropbox, but we should be ready to lash out if it is blatant. Also, what if I blog about how great DigitalOcean is and have referral links in there... We can't overreach here, but we can take some kind of action if something is deliberately targetted for our community...

I'm glad we're ironing this out though :)

[notheotherben]

I agree regarding the whole "act in accordance with the CoC" thing, but I think that banning people based on past or present career paths isn't really the best way to approach it. I really like the idea that this is a code of conduct, and that people who abide by it (and are developers in South Africa) will be welcomed by our community - in that light I don't think someone's job should be a requirement for entry PROVIDED their presence contributes to the community.

In a complete hypothetical example, let's say AI suddenly became a universally accessible approach to solving problems, it may well be beneficial to allow someone who is an AI researcher, or an expert in mathematical algorithms to join in the conversation (if they wanted to of course) even though they are not strictly a software developer.

What I'd like to see is a case where people who share these interests are permitted provided they do not harass other members directly or indirectly. So in a recruiter's case, you'd be permitted to join provided you were (also) a software developer and you made use of the ZA Developers community only for software development related discussions. If you were to then build a relationship with people in the community and (with their explicit request) over an out-of-band channel provide them with recruitment opportunities then I'd see absolutely no problem with it - it doesn't affect the community, ensures that the community remains focused on software development and encourages the development of personal relationships.

Yeah, I think that indicating that we are referring to links which reward the poster as a result of people clicking them should cover that. Situations where you are required to interact with content knowingly (i.e. clicking on an advert on the linked page, or subscribing to something presented therein) are then the user's responsibility - as they are informed (enough) to make the decision themselves. I get the sense that you're basically trying to prevent people from tricking members into clicking on links for no reason other than their own reward. Also like the idea that you report such stuff to an admin regardless of whether it's a referral link or otherwise.

Yeah, spam is a tricky one - I think rather than trying to suppress it completely we just rely on the community - if someone posts something bad enough that people consider it spam, or members notice that someone is repeatedly posting spammy material, then I think it should be the responsibility of the community to report it (effectively self-moderation).

Another issue which needs addressing is the Acceptable Content Policy - the last thing I want is to have the Slack open at work and NSFW content starts appearing on it... I'll write up a draft of that just now and we can see what people think.

[kennethkalmer]

in that light I don't think someone's job should be a requirement for entry PROVIDED their presence contributes to the community.

Yep, we should be open to new developers too. I just know that we'll face heartless recruiters (not all of them are) that will infiltrate our community and upset people, and we need to guard against that. Most of our users have a negative sentiment towards recruiters, and I don't want this to be the platform that reinforces that sentiment (and scares users off) OR for some valiant recruiter to try and save the reputation of their kind.

Recruiters have a place in the bigger eco-system, just not here. If we find someone moonlighting and not contributing, we should have the right to kick them out.

Yeah, spam is a tricky one - I think rather than trying to suppress it completely we just rely on the community

My referral link examples are wild, just needed to push the extreme. Part of building an awesome community is to allow to community to police itself. We should trust our community! So lets let community members complain about spam in general, and maybe have our wording in here (if any, actually) just guide that some commercial links might be frowned upon, and might lead to words if the poster continues.

Acceptable Content Policy

I'd love a separate PR for this, thanks thank thanks!

[notheotherben]

I don't want this to be the platform that reinforces that sentiment (and scares users off) OR for some valiant recruiter to try and save the reputation of their kind.

Okay, that definitely makes sense to me. Unfortunately I'm not sure how to go about addressing the situation in a way that prevents malicious or overzealous members from disrupting the rest (while still allowing them to become members). In an ideal world I'd like to see a situation where if the member joins and starts pedalling their job offers then they are given a warning, and failing to comply with that are removed from the community. Same holds true for people starting flame wars regarding recruiters in general (as there are definitely some very professional ones out there). To sum my view up, it's "Keep it civil, keep it professional, keep an open mind and be considerate of others."

If we find someone moonlighting and not contributing, we should have the right to kick them out.

That definitely echoes my sentiment, also agree that recruiters shouldn't be permitted access. Just wondering whether it's maybe an idea to say something like...

If you're a recruiter and you love software development, then when you're taking part in the ZA Developers community you are simply a software developer. We accept that recruiters have a place in the bigger eco-system, just not here. Targeted or blanket recruitment of members without their express request will be treated as harassment and will likely have you removed from the community.

Not sure if there's maybe a way to make it a bit less specific to recruiters? Perhaps reword it indicate that you're not supposed to rock up and start discussing your jewellery design 😄...

Guide that some commercial links might be frowned upon, and might lead to words if the poster continues.

Also sounds like a good approach to me - I'll reword the section to take that view into account (perhaps as a component of the post script?)

[kennethkalmer]

I think we need to settle on a minimum viable recruitment clause. This is a living document, we could clarify things a bit later at request of the community. I'll have a look at this PR later today again.

Thanks for helping flesh this out!