mirror of
https://github.com/SuperClaude-Org/SuperClaude_Framework.git
synced 2025-12-29 16:16:08 +00:00
## Command Syntax Standardization - Fix lowercase "superclaude" → "SuperClaude" in installation.md - Distinguish between terminal commands (SuperClaude install) and Claude Code commands (/sc:*) - Add clear command context headers to all major documentation files ## Documentation Improvements - Add command reference tables to key guides - Create visual distinction markers (🖥️ Terminal vs 💬 Claude Code) - Update verification sections with proper command separation - Fix content duplications in Developer-Guide and Getting-Started files ## Cross-Reference Updates - Standardize all documentation links to use Docs/ prefix structure - Replace invalid email addresses with anton.knoery@gmail.com - Remove non-existent team references from security documentation ## Files Enhanced - Getting-Started: installation.md, quick-start.md with command clarity - User-Guide: commands.md with comprehensive command context - Reference: troubleshooting.md, common-issues.md with mixed command support - Root files: README.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, SECURITY.md link updates This resolves command confusion between installation (terminal) and development (/sc:) commands. 🤖 Generated with Claude Code Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
555 lines
28 KiB
Markdown
555 lines
28 KiB
Markdown
# Code of Conduct
|
|
|
|
## 🤝 Our Commitment
|
|
|
|
SuperClaude Framework is committed to fostering an inclusive, professional, and collaborative community focused on advancing AI-assisted software development. We welcome contributors of all backgrounds, experience levels, and perspectives to participate in building better development tools and workflows.
|
|
|
|
**Our Mission**: Create a supportive environment where software developers can learn, contribute, and innovate together while maintaining the highest standards of technical excellence and professional conduct.
|
|
|
|
**Core Values**: Technical merit, inclusive collaboration, continuous learning, and practical utility guide all community interactions and decisions.
|
|
|
|
## 🎯 Our Standards
|
|
|
|
### Positive Behavior ✅
|
|
|
|
**Professional Communication:**
|
|
- Use clear, technical language appropriate for software development discussions
|
|
- Provide constructive feedback with specific examples and actionable suggestions
|
|
- Ask clarifying questions before making assumptions about requirements or implementations
|
|
- Share knowledge and experience to help others learn and improve
|
|
|
|
**Collaborative Development:**
|
|
- Focus on technical merit and project goals in all discussions and decisions
|
|
- Respect different experience levels and provide mentorship opportunities
|
|
- Acknowledge contributions and give credit where appropriate
|
|
- Participate in code review with constructive, educational feedback
|
|
|
|
**Inclusive Participation:**
|
|
- Welcome newcomers with patience and helpful guidance
|
|
- Use inclusive language that considers diverse backgrounds and perspectives
|
|
- Provide context and explanations for technical decisions and recommendations
|
|
- Create learning opportunities through documentation and examples
|
|
|
|
**Quality Focus:**
|
|
- Maintain high standards for code quality, documentation, and user experience
|
|
- Prioritize user value and practical utility in feature discussions
|
|
- Support evidence-based decision making with testing and validation
|
|
- Contribute to long-term project sustainability and maintainability
|
|
|
|
**Community Building:**
|
|
- Participate in discussions with good faith and positive intent
|
|
- Share workflows, patterns, and solutions that benefit the community
|
|
- Help others troubleshoot issues and learn framework capabilities
|
|
- Celebrate community achievements and milestones
|
|
|
|
### Unacceptable Behavior ❌
|
|
|
|
**Disrespectful Communication:**
|
|
- Personal attacks, insults, or derogatory comments about individuals or groups
|
|
- Harassment, trolling, or deliberately disruptive behavior
|
|
- Discriminatory language or behavior based on personal characteristics
|
|
- Public or private harassment of community members
|
|
|
|
**Unprofessional Conduct:**
|
|
- Deliberately sharing misinformation or providing harmful technical advice
|
|
- Spamming, advertising unrelated products, or promotional content
|
|
- Attempting to manipulate discussions or decision-making processes
|
|
- Violating intellectual property rights or licensing terms
|
|
|
|
**Destructive Behavior:**
|
|
- Sabotaging project infrastructure, code, or community resources
|
|
- Intentionally introducing security vulnerabilities or malicious code
|
|
- Sharing private or confidential information without permission
|
|
- Deliberately disrupting project operations or community activities
|
|
|
|
**Technical Misconduct:**
|
|
- Submitting plagiarized code or claiming others' work as your own
|
|
- Knowingly providing incorrect or misleading technical information
|
|
- Ignoring security best practices or introducing unnecessary risks
|
|
- Circumventing established review processes or quality gates
|
|
|
|
**Community Violations:**
|
|
- Violating project licensing terms or contributor agreements
|
|
- Using community platforms for commercial promotion without permission
|
|
- Creating multiple accounts to circumvent moderation or bans
|
|
- Coordinating attacks or harassment campaigns against community members
|
|
|
|
## 📋 Our Responsibilities
|
|
|
|
### Project Maintainers
|
|
**Community Standards Enforcement:**
|
|
- Monitor community interactions and maintain professional discussion standards
|
|
- Address code of conduct violations promptly and fairly
|
|
- Provide clear explanations for moderation decisions and consequences
|
|
- Ensure consistent application of community standards across all platforms
|
|
|
|
**Technical Leadership:**
|
|
- Maintain project quality standards through code review and architectural guidance
|
|
- Make final decisions on technical direction and feature priorities
|
|
- Ensure security best practices and responsible disclosure handling
|
|
- Coordinate release management and compatibility maintenance
|
|
|
|
**Inclusive Community Building:**
|
|
- Welcome new contributors and provide onboarding guidance
|
|
- Facilitate constructive discussions and help resolve technical disagreements
|
|
- Recognize and celebrate community contributions appropriately
|
|
- Create opportunities for skill development and knowledge sharing
|
|
|
|
**Transparency and Communication:**
|
|
- Communicate project decisions and rationale clearly to the community
|
|
- Provide regular updates on project status, roadmap, and priorities
|
|
- Respond to community questions and concerns in a timely manner
|
|
- Maintain open and accessible communication channels
|
|
|
|
**Conflict Resolution:**
|
|
- Address interpersonal conflicts with fairness and professionalism
|
|
- Mediate technical disagreements and help find consensus solutions
|
|
- Escalate serious violations to appropriate enforcement mechanisms
|
|
- Document decisions and maintain consistent enforcement policies
|
|
|
|
### Community Members
|
|
**Technical Contribution Quality:**
|
|
- Follow established coding standards, testing requirements, and documentation guidelines
|
|
- Participate in code review process constructively and responsively
|
|
- Ensure contributions align with project goals and architectural principles
|
|
- Test changes thoroughly and provide clear descriptions of functionality
|
|
|
|
**Professional Communication:**
|
|
- Communicate respectfully and professionally in all community interactions
|
|
- Provide helpful feedback and ask clarifying questions when needed
|
|
- Share knowledge and help others learn framework capabilities
|
|
- Report technical issues with clear reproduction steps and relevant context
|
|
|
|
**Community Participation:**
|
|
- Read and follow project documentation, including contributing guidelines
|
|
- Respect maintainer decisions and project direction while providing constructive input
|
|
- Help newcomers learn the framework and contribute effectively
|
|
- Participate in discussions with good faith and focus on technical merit
|
|
|
|
**Responsible Behavior:**
|
|
- Report code of conduct violations through appropriate channels
|
|
- Respect intellectual property rights and licensing requirements
|
|
- Maintain confidentiality of private information and security-sensitive details
|
|
- Use community resources responsibly and avoid disruptive behavior
|
|
|
|
**Continuous Learning:**
|
|
- Stay updated on project changes, best practices, and security considerations
|
|
- Seek feedback on contributions and incorporate suggestions for improvement
|
|
- Share experiences and patterns that benefit the broader community
|
|
- Contribute to documentation and educational resources when possible
|
|
|
|
## 🚨 Enforcement
|
|
|
|
### Reporting Issues
|
|
|
|
**Reporting Channels:**
|
|
|
|
**Primary Contact:**
|
|
- **Email**: anton.knoery@gmail.com (monitored by conduct team)
|
|
- **Response Time**: 48-72 hours for initial acknowledgment
|
|
- **Confidentiality**: All reports treated with appropriate discretion
|
|
|
|
**Alternative Channels:**
|
|
- **GitHub Issues**: For public discussion of community standards and policies
|
|
- **Direct Contact**: Individual maintainer contact for urgent situations
|
|
- **Anonymous Reporting**: Anonymous form available for sensitive situations
|
|
|
|
**What to Include in Reports:**
|
|
- Clear description of the incident or behavior
|
|
- Date, time, and location (platform/channel) where incident occurred
|
|
- Names of individuals involved (if known and relevant)
|
|
- Screenshots, links, or other evidence (if available)
|
|
- Impact on you or the community
|
|
- Previous related incidents (if applicable)
|
|
|
|
**Reporting Template:**
|
|
```
|
|
**Incident Description:**
|
|
[Clear summary of what occurred]
|
|
|
|
**Date/Time/Location:**
|
|
[When and where the incident took place]
|
|
|
|
**Individuals Involved:**
|
|
[Names or usernames of people involved]
|
|
|
|
**Evidence:**
|
|
[Links, screenshots, or other supporting information]
|
|
|
|
**Impact:**
|
|
[How this affected you or the community]
|
|
|
|
**Additional Context:**
|
|
[Any other relevant information or previous incidents]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Support for Reporters:**
|
|
- Guidance on documentation and evidence collection
|
|
- Regular updates on investigation progress
|
|
- Protection from retaliation or further harassment
|
|
- Resources for additional support if needed
|
|
|
|
### Investigation Process
|
|
|
|
**Investigation Process:**
|
|
|
|
**Initial Response (24-48 hours):**
|
|
- Acknowledge receipt of report to reporter
|
|
- Review submitted evidence and documentation
|
|
- Identify conduct team members for investigation (avoiding conflicts of interest)
|
|
- Take immediate action if required to prevent ongoing harm
|
|
|
|
**Investigation Phase (3-7 days):**
|
|
- Gather additional information and evidence as needed
|
|
- Interview relevant parties while maintaining confidentiality
|
|
- Consult with other maintainers and conduct team members
|
|
- Review similar past incidents for consistency in handling
|
|
|
|
**Decision and Response (7-14 days from initial report):**
|
|
- Determine whether code of conduct violation occurred
|
|
- Decide on appropriate consequences based on severity and impact
|
|
- Communicate decision to reporter and involved parties
|
|
- Implement consequences and monitoring as appropriate
|
|
|
|
**Timeline Extensions:**
|
|
- Complex cases may require additional investigation time
|
|
- Reporter notified of any delays with updated timeline
|
|
- Urgent cases prioritized for faster resolution
|
|
- External consultation may be sought for serious violations
|
|
|
|
**Documentation and Follow-up:**
|
|
- All incidents documented for pattern recognition and consistency
|
|
- Follow-up communication to ensure resolution effectiveness
|
|
- Policy updates if investigation reveals gaps or improvements needed
|
|
- Community notification for serious violations affecting project safety
|
|
|
|
**Confidentiality:**
|
|
- Investigation details kept confidential to protect all parties
|
|
- Information shared only with conduct team and relevant maintainers
|
|
- Public disclosure only when necessary for community safety
|
|
- Reporter identity protected unless they consent to disclosure
|
|
|
|
### Possible Consequences
|
|
|
|
**Consequence Levels:**
|
|
|
|
**Level 1: Education and Guidance**
|
|
- **For**: Minor violations, first-time issues, misunderstandings
|
|
- **Actions**: Private conversation, resource sharing, clarification of expectations
|
|
- **Examples**: Inappropriate language, unclear communication, minor disruption
|
|
- **Monitoring**: Informal follow-up to ensure improvement
|
|
|
|
**Level 2: Formal Warning**
|
|
- **For**: Repeated minor violations, moderate behavioral issues
|
|
- **Actions**: Written warning, specific behavior changes required, defined monitoring period
|
|
- **Examples**: Continued disrespectful communication, ignoring feedback, minor harassment
|
|
- **Monitoring**: Structured check-ins and progress evaluation
|
|
|
|
**Level 3: Temporary Restrictions**
|
|
- **For**: Serious violations, repeated warnings ignored, significant disruption
|
|
- **Actions**: Temporary ban from specific platforms, contribution restrictions, supervision required
|
|
- **Duration**: 1-30 days depending on severity
|
|
- **Examples**: Personal attacks, deliberate misinformation, persistent harassment
|
|
|
|
**Level 4: Long-term Suspension**
|
|
- **For**: Severe violations, pattern of harmful behavior, community impact
|
|
- **Actions**: Extended ban from all community platforms and contribution activities
|
|
- **Duration**: 3-12 months with defined rehabilitation requirements
|
|
- **Examples**: Serious harassment, security violations, malicious code submission
|
|
|
|
**Level 5: Permanent Ban**
|
|
- **For**: Extreme violations, threats to community safety, legal violations
|
|
- **Actions**: Permanent removal from all community spaces and activities
|
|
- **No Appeals**: Reserved for the most serious violations only
|
|
- **Examples**: Doxxing, threats of violence, serious legal violations, coordinated attacks
|
|
|
|
**Appeals Process:**
|
|
- Available for Levels 2-4 within 30 days of decision
|
|
- Must include acknowledgment of behavior and improvement plan
|
|
- Reviewed by different conduct team members than original decision
|
|
- Appeals focus on process fairness and proportionality of consequences
|
|
|
|
## 🌍 Scope
|
|
|
|
**GitHub Repositories:**
|
|
- SuperClaude Framework main repository and all related repositories
|
|
- Issues, pull requests, discussions, and code review interactions
|
|
- Repository wikis, documentation, and project boards
|
|
- Release notes, commit messages, and repository metadata
|
|
|
|
**Communication Platforms:**
|
|
- GitHub Discussions and Issues for project-related communication
|
|
- Any official SuperClaude social media accounts or announcements
|
|
- Community forums, chat channels, or messaging platforms
|
|
- Video calls, meetings, or webinars related to the project
|
|
|
|
**Events and Conferences:**
|
|
- SuperClaude-sponsored events, meetups, or conference presentations
|
|
- Community workshops, training sessions, or educational events
|
|
- Online events, webinars, or live streams featuring SuperClaude
|
|
- Informal gatherings or meetups organized by community members
|
|
|
|
**External Platforms:**
|
|
- Stack Overflow, Reddit, or other platforms when discussing SuperClaude
|
|
- Social media interactions related to the project or community
|
|
- Blog posts, articles, or publications about SuperClaude Framework
|
|
- Professional networking platforms when representing the community
|
|
|
|
**Private Communications:**
|
|
- Direct messages between community members about project matters
|
|
- Email communications related to project contributions or support
|
|
- Private discussions about technical issues or collaboration
|
|
- Mentorship relationships formed through community participation
|
|
|
|
**Representation Guidelines:**
|
|
When representing SuperClaude Framework in any capacity:
|
|
- Professional behavior expected regardless of platform or context
|
|
- Community standards apply even in informal settings
|
|
- Consider impact on project reputation and community relationships
|
|
- Seek guidance from maintainers when uncertain about representation
|
|
|
|
## 💬 Guidelines for Healthy Discussion
|
|
|
|
**Technical Discussion Best Practices:**
|
|
|
|
**Focus on Merit:**
|
|
- Base arguments on technical evidence, user value, and project goals
|
|
- Provide specific examples, benchmarks, or test results to support positions
|
|
- Consider multiple perspectives and trade-offs in complex decisions
|
|
- Acknowledge when you lack expertise and seek input from domain experts
|
|
|
|
**Constructive Disagreement:**
|
|
- Disagree with ideas and approaches, not individuals
|
|
- Explain reasoning clearly and provide alternative solutions
|
|
- Ask clarifying questions to understand different viewpoints
|
|
- Find common ground and build consensus through collaboration
|
|
|
|
**Knowledge Sharing:**
|
|
- Share context and background for technical decisions
|
|
- Explain concepts clearly for community members with different experience levels
|
|
- Provide links to documentation, examples, or external resources
|
|
- Contribute to collective understanding through detailed explanations
|
|
|
|
**Decision Making:**
|
|
- Respect maintainer authority for final technical decisions
|
|
- Provide input early in the decision process rather than after implementation
|
|
- Accept decisions gracefully while maintaining option for future discussion
|
|
- Focus on implementation quality and user impact over personal preferences
|
|
|
|
**Community Discussion Guidelines:**
|
|
|
|
**Inclusive Participation:**
|
|
- Welcome newcomers and provide context for ongoing discussions
|
|
- Use clear language and avoid excessive jargon or insider references
|
|
- Provide multiple ways to participate (writing, examples, testing, etc.)
|
|
- Encourage diverse perspectives and experience sharing
|
|
|
|
**Productive Conversations:**
|
|
- Stay on topic and maintain focus on actionable outcomes
|
|
- Break complex discussions into smaller, manageable topics
|
|
- Summarize long discussions and highlight key decisions or next steps
|
|
- Use threading and clear subject lines to organize related discussions
|
|
|
|
## 🎓 Educational Approach
|
|
|
|
**Educational Philosophy:**
|
|
|
|
SuperClaude Framework prioritizes education and growth over punishment when addressing community issues. We believe most conflicts arise from misunderstandings, different experience levels, or lack of context rather than malicious intent.
|
|
|
|
**Learning-Focused Enforcement:**
|
|
- First response focuses on education and clarification of expectations
|
|
- Provide resources and examples for better community participation
|
|
- Connect community members with mentors and learning opportunities
|
|
- Emphasize skill development and professional growth through participation
|
|
|
|
**Conflict Resolution Approach:**
|
|
- Address underlying causes of conflicts rather than just symptoms
|
|
- Facilitate direct communication between parties when appropriate
|
|
- Provide mediation and guidance for technical and interpersonal disagreements
|
|
- Focus on finding solutions that benefit the entire community
|
|
|
|
**Progressive Development:**
|
|
- Recognize that community participation skills develop over time
|
|
- Provide scaffolding and support for newcomers learning professional communication
|
|
- Create opportunities for community members to learn from mistakes
|
|
- Celebrate growth and improvement in community participation
|
|
|
|
**Restorative Practices:**
|
|
- Encourage acknowledgment of harm and genuine efforts to make amends
|
|
- Focus on rebuilding trust and relationships after conflicts
|
|
- Provide pathways for community members to contribute positively after violations
|
|
- Balance accountability with opportunities for redemption and growth
|
|
|
|
**Community Learning:**
|
|
- Use conflicts as learning opportunities for the entire community
|
|
- Share lessons learned (while protecting individual privacy)
|
|
- Update policies and practices based on community experience
|
|
- Build collective wisdom about effective collaboration and communication
|
|
|
|
## 📞 Contact Information
|
|
|
|
### Conduct Team
|
|
**Conduct Team:**
|
|
- **Primary Contact**: anton.knoery@gmail.com
|
|
- **Team Composition**: Selected maintainers and community members with training in conflict resolution
|
|
- **Response Time**: 48-72 hours for initial acknowledgment
|
|
- **Availability**: Monitored continuously with escalation procedures for urgent issues
|
|
|
|
**Team Responsibilities:**
|
|
- Review and investigate code of conduct violation reports
|
|
- Provide guidance on community standards and policy interpretation
|
|
- Mediate conflicts and facilitate resolution between community members
|
|
- Recommend policy updates based on community needs and experiences
|
|
|
|
**Expertise Areas:**
|
|
- **Technical Guidance**: Code review standards, contribution quality, project architecture
|
|
- **Community Building**: Inclusive participation, mentorship, conflict resolution
|
|
- **Security**: Vulnerability reporting, responsible disclosure, safety protocols
|
|
- **Legal Compliance**: Licensing, intellectual property, harassment prevention
|
|
|
|
**Confidentiality and Impartiality:**
|
|
- All conduct team members trained in confidential information handling
|
|
- Recusal procedures for cases involving personal relationships or conflicts of interest
|
|
- External consultation available for complex cases requiring specialized expertise
|
|
- Regular training updates on best practices for community management
|
|
|
|
**Contact Preferences:**
|
|
- **Email**: anton.knoery@gmail.com for all formal reports and inquiries
|
|
- **Anonymous**: Anonymous reporting form available for sensitive situations
|
|
- **Urgent**: Emergency contact procedures for immediate safety concerns
|
|
- **Follow-up**: Scheduled check-ins for ongoing cases and policy discussions
|
|
|
|
### Project Leadership
|
|
**Project Leadership:**
|
|
- **Maintainers**: @SuperClaude-Org maintainer team on GitHub
|
|
- **Issues**: GitHub Issues with `conduct` or `community` labels for public policy discussions
|
|
- **Email**: anton.knoery@gmail.com for general leadership questions
|
|
|
|
**Leadership Responsibilities:**
|
|
- **Policy Development**: Creating and updating community standards and enforcement procedures
|
|
- **Strategic Direction**: Ensuring community policies align with project goals and values
|
|
- **Resource Allocation**: Providing support and resources for community management
|
|
- **Final Appeals**: Serving as final authority for serious enforcement decisions
|
|
|
|
**Escalation Procedures:**
|
|
- **Level 1**: Conduct team handles day-to-day community management
|
|
- **Level 2**: Project maintainers involved for policy questions and serious violations
|
|
- **Level 3**: Project leadership council for appeals and policy changes
|
|
- **External**: Legal counsel or external mediation for extreme cases
|
|
|
|
**Policy Questions:**
|
|
- **Community Standards**: Interpretation of code of conduct and enforcement guidelines
|
|
- **Inclusion Practices**: Guidance on inclusive participation and accessibility
|
|
- **Technical Standards**: Integration of community standards with technical contribution requirements
|
|
- **External Relations**: Representation of community standards in external partnerships
|
|
|
|
**Public Communication:**
|
|
- **Transparency**: Regular updates on community health and policy effectiveness
|
|
- **Education**: Resources and training for community members and contributors
|
|
- **Accountability**: Public reporting on enforcement actions and policy changes
|
|
- **Feedback**: Open channels for community input on policies and procedures
|
|
|
|
## 🙏 Acknowledgments
|
|
|
|
**Code of Conduct Sources:**
|
|
|
|
This code of conduct draws inspiration from several established community standards and best practices:
|
|
|
|
**Primary Sources:**
|
|
- **Contributor Covenant**: Industry-standard framework for open source community standards
|
|
- **Python Community Code of Conduct**: Emphasis on technical excellence and inclusive participation
|
|
- **Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines**: Focus on healthy contribution and conflict resolution
|
|
- **GitHub Community Guidelines**: Platform-specific behavior standards and enforcement practices
|
|
|
|
**Professional Standards:**
|
|
- **ACM Code of Ethics**: Professional computing and software development standards
|
|
- **IEEE Code of Ethics**: Engineering ethics and professional responsibility
|
|
- **Software Engineering Body of Knowledge**: Best practices for collaborative software development
|
|
- **Open Source Initiative**: Community building and governance best practices
|
|
|
|
**Academic Research:**
|
|
- **Diversity and Inclusion in Open Source**: Research on effective inclusive community practices
|
|
- **Conflict Resolution in Technical Communities**: Evidence-based approaches to technical disagreement
|
|
- **Psychological Safety in Teams**: Creating environments for effective collaboration and learning
|
|
- **Community of Practice Theory**: Building knowledge-sharing communities
|
|
|
|
**Legal and Compliance:**
|
|
- **Anti-Harassment Laws**: Applicable legal standards for workplace and community behavior
|
|
- **International Human Rights Standards**: Universal principles for respectful interaction
|
|
- **Platform Terms of Service**: Compliance with GitHub and other platform community standards
|
|
- **Accessibility Guidelines**: Ensuring inclusive participation for diverse abilities and backgrounds
|
|
|
|
## 📚 Additional Resources
|
|
|
|
**Community Building Resources:**
|
|
|
|
**Inclusive Participation:**
|
|
- [Mozilla's Inclusion and Diversity Guide](https://wiki.mozilla.org/Inclusion) - Practical strategies for inclusive communities
|
|
- [GitHub's Open Source Guide](https://opensource.guide/) - Community building and maintenance
|
|
- [CHAOSS Diversity & Inclusion Metrics](https://chaoss.community/) - Measuring community health and inclusion
|
|
- [Turing Way Community Handbook](https://the-turing-way.netlify.app/) - Collaborative research community practices
|
|
|
|
**Conflict Resolution:**
|
|
- [Contributor Covenant Enforcement Guide](https://www.contributor-covenant.org/enforcement/) - Best practices for code of conduct enforcement
|
|
- [Restorative Justice in Tech](https://www.restorativejusticefortech.com/) - Alternative approaches to community conflict
|
|
- [Crucial Conversations](https://cruciallearning.com/) - Professional communication and difficult conversations
|
|
- [Harvard Negotiation Project](https://www.pon.harvard.edu/) - Interest-based negotiation and conflict resolution
|
|
|
|
**Bystander Intervention:**
|
|
- **Recognize**: Identify when community standards are being violated or when someone needs support
|
|
- **Assess**: Evaluate the situation and determine the most appropriate response
|
|
- **Act**: Intervene directly, seek help from moderators, or provide support to affected parties
|
|
- **Follow Up**: Check on involved parties and report incidents to appropriate authorities
|
|
|
|
**Professional Development:**
|
|
- [Software Engineering Ethics](https://ethics.acm.org/) - Professional standards for computing professionals
|
|
- [IEEE Computer Society Code of Ethics](https://www.computer.org/code-of-ethics) - Technical professional standards
|
|
- [Open Source Citizenship](https://github.com/opensourcecitizenship/opensourcecitizenship) - Responsible open source participation
|
|
- [Tech Workers Coalition](https://techworkerscoalition.org/) - Collective action and professional responsibility
|
|
|
|
**Educational Resources:**
|
|
- [Unconscious Bias Training](https://www.google.com/search?q=unconscious+bias+training) - Understanding and addressing implicit bias
|
|
- [Active Bystander Training](https://www.ihollaback.org/) - Intervention strategies for harassment and discrimination
|
|
- [Psychological Safety](https://rework.withgoogle.com/guides/understanding-team-effectiveness/) - Creating safe environments for collaboration
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Policy Maintenance:**
|
|
|
|
**Last Updated**: December 2024 (SuperClaude Framework v4.0)
|
|
**Next Review**: June 2025 (Semi-annual review cycle)
|
|
**Version**: 4.0.0 (Updated for v4 community structure and governance)
|
|
|
|
**Review Schedule:**
|
|
- **Semi-Annual Reviews**: Policy effectiveness assessment and community feedback integration
|
|
- **Incident-Based Updates**: Policy updates following significant enforcement actions or lessons learned
|
|
- **Community-Driven Changes**: Updates based on community proposals and feedback
|
|
- **Legal Compliance Updates**: Updates to maintain compliance with changing legal standards
|
|
|
|
**Change Process:**
|
|
- **Minor Updates**: Clarifications, contact updates, and resource additions
|
|
- **Major Updates**: Substantial policy changes with community discussion and feedback period
|
|
- **Emergency Updates**: Critical changes for community safety with immediate implementation
|
|
- **Community Input**: Regular solicitation of feedback through surveys and open discussions
|
|
|
|
**Community Acknowledgments:**
|
|
|
|
SuperClaude Framework's inclusive and professional community culture benefits from the active participation of contributors who embody these values in their daily interactions and technical contributions.
|
|
|
|
**Community Contributors:**
|
|
- Community members who model professional communication and inclusive participation
|
|
- Contributors who provide mentorship and support to newcomers and fellow developers
|
|
- Individuals who report issues constructively and help maintain community standards
|
|
- Advocates who promote the framework and community in external venues
|
|
|
|
**Positive Impact Recognition:**
|
|
- [GitHub Contributors](https://github.com/SuperClaude-Org/SuperClaude_Framework/graphs/contributors) - Technical and community contributions
|
|
- Community discussions highlight helpful guidance, mentorship, and collaborative problem-solving
|
|
- Regular appreciation for inclusive behavior and professional communication
|
|
- Annual community recognition for outstanding contributions to community culture
|
|
|
|
**Growing Community:**
|
|
The SuperClaude community continues to grow through shared commitment to technical excellence, inclusive collaboration, and continuous learning. Community-focused contributions, from welcoming newcomers to facilitating productive discussions, strengthen the environment for all participants.
|
|
|
|
**Join Our Community:**
|
|
Whether you're contributing code, improving documentation, helping others learn, or participating in discussions, your commitment to professional and inclusive behavior helps build a better software development community for everyone. Every positive interaction contributes to our collective success and the advancement of AI-assisted development tools. |