AI Magazine - Spring 2018

should specify what is considered
unacceptable behavior. Once everyone
agrees to the Code of Conduct, a sec-
ond document should address mecha-
nisms for addressing grievances and
violations of the Code of Conduct. Ted
Senator noted that the Bylaws allow
the Council to decide on qualifications
for membership, and the Code of Con-
duct would represent one of those
qualifications. Therefore, keeping the
document lean is crucial at this junc-
ture. Gil noted that violations of the
Code of Conduct may be perpetrated
by nonmembers who are attending a
this method of approval. Rossi men-
tioned that the most controversial sec-
tion is the one that she described
above (section one). Yolanda Gil
encouraged the Council to include spe-
cific language in the document that
would provide steps available for an
individual to report harassment or dis-
crimination of any kind. Of particular
importance is a completely confiden-
tial avenue to report the incident to
protect other potential victims as well
as the current victim. Kambhampati
noted that the Code of Conduct
should not include mechanisms, but
AAAI conference, so we may want to
have similar expectations for confer-
ence attendees. Senator noted that we
can stipulate that anyone participating
in one of our conferences is automati-
cally a member so that the Code of
Conduct would apply to all. Gene
Freuder encouraged the Council to for-
mulate a set of specific sanctions for
violators that might affect their mem-
bership in AAAI, future conference
attendance, and possible other conse-
quences. Hamilton reminded the
group that we need to be careful about
proceeding without thorough investi-
gation, or without involving the
appropriate authorities for the situa-
tion. Gil suggested that we provide a
procedure for victims to register a com-
plaint, and act only as the mechanism
to detect patterns. Senator agreed that
the Code of Conduct should not spec-
ify the enforcement; it should only
specify the behavior. Kambhampati
encouraged the Council to agree on
the Code of Conduct so that it can be
communicated to the members as
soon as possible. The mechanisms
developed to deal with violations will
likely evolve over time.

Blai Bonet raised the issue that some members might be hesitant to agree to the code because they might not be sure that they are in compliance with all the guidelines. He suggested that the Code be linked to a specific research (or papers) rather than to all the activities of a specific individual. Kambhampati responded that as a Society we can set certain expectations for the conduct of our members, and that we do not have to get into the fine granularity of specific research by an individual. Senator noted that, like ACM and IEEE, we can require that AAAI members accept the Code of Conduct as a requirement of membership. Keeping the document lightweight will allow individuals to accept the broader interpretation of the code. Authors are already required to comply with the AAAI Publications Ethics and Malpractice Statement before submitting their papers.