{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319/events","html_url":"https://github.com/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319","id":102815025,"number":319,"title":"determine Gratipay's response to questions about the Gittip Crisis","user":{"login":"whit537","id":134455,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/134455?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537","html_url":"https://github.com/whit537","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":82,"created_at":"2015-08-24T15:08:53Z","updated_at":"2015-12-05T04:37:34Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Reticketed from #312.\r\n\r\nAs we start stepping out again in the open-source community, we're going to get people asking us questions about the [Gittip Crisis](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Gittip_crisis). What's our plan for responding to them?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/comments/162138787","html_url":"https://github.com/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319#issuecomment-162138787","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/319","id":162138787,"user":{"login":"whit537","id":134455,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/134455?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537","html_url":"https://github.com/whit537","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/whit537/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-12-05T04:37:34Z","updated_at":"2015-12-05T04:37:34Z","body":">> This seems like a worthwhile point, that isn't adequately represented in the current formulation of \"*Gratipay’s mission is to cultivate an economy of gratitude, generosity, and love.*\"\r\n>>\r\n@whit537, are safety and consent values worth elevating into the mission statement in some form?\r\n>\r\n> Done in https://github.com/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/commit/326cb50492c8ec41bd15dfd1a9d1e0f7b4db6a42. While it's fair to say that we're not giving safety and consent \"the absolute highest priority,\" we *are* explicitly prioritizing them above openness: they are a \"necessary precondition.\"\r\n\r\nCan we work on this part some more? I don't feel like we've arrived quite yet.\r\n\r\nI'm now seeing safety, consent, transparency, openness, and love to be levels of development in the relationship between the individual and the group, along the lines of Maslow's [hierarchy of needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs) in personal motivation. The more basic levels—safety and consent—are indeed \"the absolute highest priority,\" in the sense that, without them, attempts by the group to practice transparency or openness are not just irrelevant, they are actively *destructive* of safety and consent (note that the *individual* is the one who gets to decide when they are safe and have consented). On the other hand, safety and consent are not ends in themselves, any more than transparency and openness are: love is the end, and the rest are means, each to the next. I'm defining love as an [interdependent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdependence) union of wills. The distinction between transparency and openness as sharing of information and control comes from over in the [OCI](https://github.com/opencompany/www.opencompany.org/issues/21#issuecomment-31260256).\r\n\r\n```\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n                                         LOVE\r\n                                    interdependent\r\n                                    union of wills\r\n\r\n                                       OPENNESS\r\n                                  sharing of control\r\n\r\n                                     TRANSPARENCY\r\n                                sharing of information\r\n\r\n                                       CONSENT\r\n                                the group does not act \r\n                     upon the individual without their permission\r\n\r\n                                        SAFETY\r\n           physical and emotional security, as determined by the individual\r\n\r\n\r\n                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\r\n                  The Individual's Hierarchy of Needs From the Group\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n```\r\n\r\nThis framework makes sense of love being in the mission without explicitly naming the others: love is our end, and safety, consent, transparency, and openness are means. How about gratitude and generosity? I suppose we would say that they are the *economic* expression of love. We are cultivating an *economy*, after all.\r\n\r\nI propose that we rework our [welcome](http://inside.gratipay.com/big-picture/welcome), [mission](http://inside.gratipay.com/big-picture/mission) and/or [brand](http://inside.gratipay.com/big-picture/brand/) documents to utilize this model, and reference this in \"[Learning from the Gittip Crisis](https://medium.com/gratipay-blog/learning-from-the-gittip-crisis-4d0b1535dfce).\"\r\n\r\nObjections?"}}