Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-council
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-council <gentoo-council@g.o>
From: Ferris McCormick <fmccor@g.o>
Subject: Re: CoC enforcement proposal
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:46:37 +0000
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 10:53 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 13:12 Thu 08 Nov     , Ferris McCormick wrote:
> > This is a big step forward, and if we had a binary situation:  either
> > accept it as written or go back to the drawing board, I'd prefer to
> > accept.  Thus my comments which follow are best viewed as requests for
> > clarification or of personal inclination.
> 
> Thanks for your comments, and I want to reiterate that we certainly do 
> not have a binary situation in that respect. What we do have is 
> preliminary text that could use suggestions like yours. =)
> 
> > 1.  Are 3 (or 5) people sufficient to ensure quick reactions to mailing
> > list questions or IRC?  This is minor, and starting with 3 to put the
> > process in place and tune it as needed probably works.  My concern is
> > longer term.  Speaking for myself, for instance, I almost never see
> > problems on IRC until they are long over, and I suspect this is the case
> > for most people.  Similarly (usually) with mail.  And I don't think we
> > want a corps of full-time monitors.
> 
> I understand your point, which amne also brought up. My main concerns 
> with a larger group are that it will be unable to maintain a cohesive 
> view of the CoC and that anyone who feels like it can join up.
> 
I think I agree that fewer is better in this case.  Starting with 3
growing to 5 probably works about right.  At least until we have some
experience.

> > 2.  As to forums, I've never seen that the forum moderators need any
> > help with what they are doing.  Actually, in a sense I think the forums
> > are kind of a model for what you are proposing.
> 
> I agree. Should we add a note that already-moderated places (#gentoo, 
> forums) should not need additional moderation?
> 

Sure.

--- Snip for economy ---

> > 5.  Do you perceive the enforcement group as an arm of the Council
> > rather than as a group of its own?  Previously, the Council did not seem
> > to know what to do when the Proctors' views of Code of Conduct and
> > Councils' *individual* views of Code of Conduct seemed to diverge.  This
> > led to the unusual step of simply eliminating the Proctors.  I rather
> > doubt that you would find much enthusiasm for working in such an
> > environment again.  So, what you are proposing probably works for any
> > given Council (assuming continuing commitment from council to council).
> > I think my concern is addressed to (a) continuing commitment; (b)
> > consistency and continuity.  The Gentoo community need to understand the
> > rules so that they become a part of our culture, so that even with
> > annual assessment, we should expect evolution rather than catastrophe.
> > 
> > (This was all a bit muddled.  That's sure indication that so are my
> > thoughts, so take it for what it's worth.)
> > 
> > 6.  "Developers can be members of both [Council and Code of Conduct
> > team]."  This is the one sentence I take exception to.  It's better to
> > work for more community involvement rather than allow concentration
> > resulting in personnel wearing multiple hats.
> 
> The above two points tie together, in my mind. It would be preferable to 
> have at least one of the team members be on council to ensure that their 
> CoC interpretations are consistent.
> 

Nice point.  You sold me, assuming agreement among the Council members
(or at least agreement to give great weight to the reading from whoever
is a member of both.)

> That gave me a new idea. What if the first 2-4 weeks, the team did not 
> actually take any action but just documented what its actions would have 
> been? This would give people a feeling for what level of enforcement 
> we'd see for the CoC.
> 

I like this.

> > 7.  Off the top of my head, why not allow (or require) that one member
> > of the team be a user but not a developer?  Userrel, all, comments?
> 
> If we could find a user with a strong enough grasp of Gentoo culture, 
> I'm open to the idea, and I'd like to make any users adjunct staff 
> members during their term to avoid that annoying "Users don't have power 
> over me" syndrome.
> 

I have one or two ideas, and I would guess so does Christel.

> Thanks,
> Donnie

Very positive,
Regards,
Ferris
-- 
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc)

Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
References:
CoC enforcement proposal
-- Donnie Berkholz
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
-- Ferris McCormick
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
-- Donnie Berkholz
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
Next by thread:
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
Previous by date:
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
Next by date:
Re: CoC enforcement proposal


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-council mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.