On 11:01 Mon 12 Nov     , Alistair Bush wrote:
> > All this team's actions must be approved by the lead within a short time
> > period or must be reverted. It's expected that many actions will range
> > from 6-12 hours, so 12 hours seems like a reasonable time to require
> > lead approval. Whenever the lead is unavailable, approval falls to the
> > council. (Remember, two council members together can make decisions.)
> 
> My only problem with this is if we are going to impower a team to
> enforce a CoC we should be prepared to stick by them.  Also what is a
> short period of time wrt 12 hours?  So either I would would hope that
> the approval of council with either be removed, or never used.

Maybe this wasn't clear, but I was trying to define the short time 
period as 12 hours. Is that the answer you're looking for?

> I believe that the reassessment of the CoC team should occur more
> frequently to begin with (at least).  i.e. every 6 month's.  As time
> progresses we may find that the period can be extended.  But im sure we
> are all aware of the importance of setting this up correctly to begin with.
> 
> I would therefore like to propose that initially there is something
> along the lines of:-
> 
> * 3 Monthly Meetings, between council and CoC Team Leader where cases
> are reviewed and advice/discussion can occur.  This should be followed
> shortly with a CoC meeting.
> 
> * 6 Monthly Meeting, where council evaluates performance and vision of
> each CoC member.

I'm a little confused by the phrasing, and I'm reading it as "a meeting 
every 3 months" and "a meeting every 6 months" because "3 monthly 
meetings" would mean three meetings every month.

I agree with you that postmortem reviews are important and valuable. At 
the very beginning, I'd suggest even communication than this because of 
the importance of getting things started right -- every council meeting 
for the first three months would not be too much.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-council@g.o mailing list