Skip to the content.

UX Writing Technical Specification API Docs Technical Documentation Knowledge Base Translation English Installation Guides Help Docs Troubleshooting Handbooks Support Docs Project Docs Portuguese Release Notes German SDK Product Discovery UX Design Spanish Copywriting Microcopy Educational Material Localization User Guides

Code of Conduct response plan template


The Code of Conduct response plan template includes:

You might also consider using the ../our-team/template-our-team.md template to let your community members know who they can contact to report a Code of Conduct violation. This document is useful beyond Code of Conduct violations. It is a core document that helps you clearly communicate who belongs to your open source project or organization.


This document explains:

Community moderators

For a list of the current {Project name} community moderators and the best way to reach them, see Community Moderators. You may contact any of these individuals to make a Code of Conduct incident report.

{Instead of linking to a separate page, you could list the names of the community moderators and their preferred contact information.}

Contacting a community moderator

You can contact a community moderator to make a Code of Conduct incident report or to discuss the process and options related to Code of Conduct incidents. To make an incident report, send a message to the community moderator that you have the best working relationship with and feel most comfortable talking.

To contact a moderator, please {describe your preferred contact method, such as sending a direct private message on Slack or some other method}. Community moderators will respond as soon as they possibly can. They might also request a one-on-one meeting with you (such as a phone call or online video conference) to get more information about the incident.

Community moderator values

Community moderators should strive to:

Requirements for community moderators

The {Project name} community moderators play an important role in the community because they help ensure the community is healthy, vibrant, and welcoming to all contributors. Because of the crucial nature of this role, potential community moderators should be invested in the long-term health of the {Project name} community and should be willing to develop a set of communication skills that may require some formal training. For that reason, individuals who are interested in serving as community moderators must:

Community moderator terms of service

The {Project name} community moderator team should consist of 3-5 community members at a given time. To prevent burnout, community moderators should serve for a recommended term limit of {time period}, unless there have been few or no incidents in that space of time. Community members should stagger terms of service to ensure there is some continuity on the team over time. Community moderators may return to serve second terms after a break from service. If possible, outgoing community moderators should recommend a replacement from the community.

Reviewing the Code of Conduct

The Code of Conduct and this document (the Code of Conduct response plan) should be reviewed by the moderator team at least once a year, typically in {time period}, to ensure these documents are meeting the needs of the community. The {Project name} community will notify the community of any revisions by publicizing the revisions in the community’s {communication platforms used by the community}.

Key terms used in this document

This section provides a definition of key terms and roles that appear in the incident response policy that follows this section:

Handling incident reports

An incident report begins when a member of {Project name} contacts a community moderator to report an incident. The moderator who is contacted should handle the incident report and should try to respond as soon as possible. This moderator will become the investigating moderator.

The investigating moderator may involve another community moderator as an additional investigator or as a replacement investigator under these conditions:

If the moderator who was contacted by an incident reporter intends to involve an additional community moderator for support or as a replacement, they should first inform the incident reporter, explain the circumstances, and offer the opportunity to withdraw their incident report if they are uncomfortable having another moderator involved.

To promote impartiality, if the incident reporter is a community moderator themselves, then a different community moderator must handle the report. See #preventing-conflicts-of-interest for more information.

Overview

All incident reports have six stages:

  1. Listen
  2. Triage
  3. Recommend
  4. Respond
  5. Follow up
  6. Resolve

See the following sections for more information about what occurs in each phase.

Listen

During the listening phase, the investigating moderator will:

Throughout the process, the investigating moderator will treat the reporter’s identity as confidential and will only disclose their identity to other moderators on a need-to-know basis.

The investigating moderator should talk directly to the person who reported the incident either through an online video conference or by phone.

During this meeting, the investigating moderator should:

During or immediately after the meeting, the investigating moderator should:

If necessary, the moderator may need to conduct additional interviews with other corroborating witnesses or may have to review any additional recorded evidence of the incident (such as emails, documents, message transcripts, or chat histories).

Triage

After completing the listening phase, the moderator should assign an initial risk and impact level to the incident using their best judgment based on the following guidelines.

Severity levels

Severity refers to the overall seriousness of the behavior and the risk that behavior will be repeated:

</table> #### Impact levels Impact refers to how public the incident was and the number of community members who were or who could have been impacted by the incident, especially members of marginalized communities:
Severity level Definition Examples
High
  • The incident is extremely severe and/or there is a high likelihood the behavior will occur again in the future.
  • Incidents that are harassing, dangerous, abusive, violent, offensive (especially to marginalized groups), or which threaten the physical and/or psychological safety of one or more community members are designated as high severity.
  • Repeated medium- or low-level offenses by the same individual are also automatically designated as high severity.
  • Sexual assault or unwanted sexual attention
  • Violent threats or language
  • Personal attacks
  • Derogatory language (especially aimed at marginalized groups)
  • Repeated inappropriate comments after a warning
Medium
  • The incident is moderately severe and is potentially disruptive to the community.
  • The incident could possibly cause one or more community members to feel unwelcome or uncomfortable in the community.
  • Mildly inappropriate comments or jokes
  • Bullying
  • Tone-policing
  • Repeatedly dominating a conversation (such as repeatedly talking over another person or not inviting discussion from others where appropriate)
  • Excessive profanity
  • Sustained disruptions of community events
  • </td> </tr>
Low The incident is minor in nature and doesn’t pose serious harm or risk of harm.
  • Heated discussions or disagreements between community members.
Impact level Definition Examples
High
  • The incident occurred in a public event, in a {Project name} meeting or community event, or on a community forum (such as on a mailing list or in Slack).
  • The accused individual is a {Project name} leader or a high-profile community member.
  • Incidents involving someone who was representing {Project name} in an official capacity while the incident occurred.
  • Comments in the {Project name} Slack or mailing list.
  • Comments or actions in a {Project name} meeting.
  • Speaking or participating at a conference or fund-raising event as a representative of {Project name}.
Low
  • The incident occurred in a private conversation, message, or email. Also includes posts or comments made in a forum or context outside of official {Project name} channels, such as on a personal social media account.
  • Comments in a private email.
  • Comments in a direct message on Slack.
  • Comments or actions made in a one-on-one meeting in person or virtually.
### Recommend Once an initial severity or impact level has been assigned, the investigating moderator should send a private message to the rest of the community moderators through email. Moderators who have recused themselves over conflicts of interest should not be included in this email. It would also be appropriate to send a separate direct message on Slack to notify the other moderators to check for the email to ensure everyone is aware of the email. In the email, indicate your assessment of the incident’s severity and impact level and your recommended response. See the [Code of Conduct](code-of-conduct.md) for the four possible responses to a conduct violation (correction, warning, temporary ban, permanent ban). Community moderators have an ethical responsibility to respond as soon as possible and work toward consensus. Delaying action in response to the Code of Conduct violation can possibly make the situation worse. In their response, moderators should indicate whether they agree with the incident severity and impact levels and the recommended response. If community moderators disagree with the original assessment, the moderators should indicate the nature of their disagreement. Where disagreements occur, the committee should work quickly to reach a consensus (ideally within 1-2 days) and may require a video conference discussion. If a consensus cannot be reached and has ended in a stalemate, the response should be put to a vote. In incidents where a tied vote occurs, the chair of the community moderators acts as the deciding vote. After a response has been recommended, the incident reporter should be notified of the outcome of the investigation and the recommended response before proceeding. ### Respond Once the incident response has been determined by the community moderators, the investigating moderator should meet with the accused individual in person (either through an online video conference or by phone). The moderator may invite an additional moderator to attend the meeting if support is desired. Before this meeting, the investigating moderator should fill out the [Code of Conduct remediation record](code-of-conduct-remediation-record.md) and use this document to guide the meeting. In this meeting, the moderator should explain the nature of the reported incident and the specifics of the incident response (correction, warning, temporary ban, permanent ban). The accused individual will be given a chance to respond (within reason) and will be informed about the process for appealing the incident response. If a new Code of Conduct violation occurs in this meeting (such as a derogatory or threatening comment made to a community moderator or about another member of the community), it should be treated as a separate incident and should be reported as a new incident to the community moderators. If the individual wishes to appeal the incident response, the community moderator can send them a link to this document for information. Ensure that the individual is aware that they must still comply with the incident response plan even if an appeal process is underway. To protect the identity of the incident reporter, the accused individual must not be given the identity of the incident reporter nor will they be allowed to contact the incident reporter, even to apologize. If an apology is required as part of the response, the following options are permissible: - The apology can be delivered to the investigating community moderator who will then deliver it to the incident reporter. - The apology may be delivered in a public forum with permission from the investigating community moderator. During or immediately after the meeting, the investigating moderator should fill out the any additional notes on the [Code of Conduct remediation record](code-of-conduct-remediation-record) to ensure that all information from the meeting has been accurately captured. ### Resolve The investigating moderator should implement the consequence(s) of the incident response, depending on what the response was. The moderator should also follow up with the incident reporter to let them know what the outcome of the report was. If a temporary ban was implemented, the community moderator who handled the incident should meet with the accused individual to ensure compliance before readmittance into the community. All documentation should be stored in the {describe where your documents are kept}: - The [Code of Conduct incident record](code-of-conduct-incident-record.md) form. - The [Code of Conduct remediation record](code-of-conduct-remediation-record.md) form. It is important to file this documentation to enable the community moderators to identify and prevent potential repeated patterns of abuse. ## Handling incident appeals If an accused individual wants to dispute the decision of the community moderators, that individual is entitled to one appeal. An appeal can be requested directly from the community moderators using the same process of reporting an incident. That means that the accused individual can send a direct message to one of the community moderators to request an appeal. While the appeal process is underway, the accused individual must still comply with the incident response plan. When an appeal is requested, 2-3 members of {Project name} {team name} will review the incident documentation and the reason for the appeal. They will consult with the community moderators about the investigation and decision-making process to determine if the Code of Conduct was fairly and properly applied. They will then recommend to uphold, modify, or reverse the original incident response. Decisions made by the {Project name} community moderators are final. ## Preventing conflicts of interest A moderator is considered to have a conflict of interest when any of the following conditions are met: - The moderator is the individual accused of a Code of Conduct violation. - The moderator has a close working or personal relationship with the individual accused of a Code of Conduct violation that could impede their ability to be impartial. - The moderator was personally involved in the Code of Conduct violation in some way (such as being the direct target of a Code of Conduct violation). Merely witnessing or being present during the incident does not necessarily qualify as a conflict of interest. Merely being part of a protected group that was targeted in a derogatory statement or action does not necessarily qualify as a conflict of interest. Moderators that meet any of these conditions should recuse themselves from all discussions and decisions about the incident where they have a conflict of interest. Another member of the community moderation team should act as the investigating moderator. The moderator with a conflict of interest should ensure that another moderator is designated to handle the incident. If the accused individual is a leader or prominent member of the {Project name} community, avoidance of a conflict of interest may not be possible as all moderators could possibly have a personal working relationship with the accused individual. In this situation, recusal is not necessary and moderators should instead make their best effort to remain impartial. [Back](./)