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@g.o
From: Alistair Bush <ali_bush@g.o>
Subject: Re: CoC enforcement proposal
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:01:24 +1300
> 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.

Some solutions to this might be that (just making them up) the CoC team
 members can use there own judgment for actions lasting less than 6
hours, and this cannot be appealed or overruled. Also an offender may
appeal to the CoC Team Leader (or Council) any offense punished by an
action lasting 6-12 hours.  I would like that to be implemented with the
following as well.

> The council
> must approve all members of this team, and it must reassess them
> annually to ensure they still interpret the CoC in the same way.
> Furthermore, the team's lead will be appointed by the council to further
> ensure a cohesive CoC interpretation.

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.

With a format like this, I hope we can strike a balance between having
an independent CoC team but still have it tightly controlled by the
council.  I would hate for example of have the CoC team overruled
continually by council members for minor issues ( for example, where a <
6 hour cool down was overruled by Council).  But I would also hate for
the council to let the CoC team run a muck.

If we are going to have a CoC team the council (as im sure you are well
aware) should be prepared to stick by their decisions even when there is
disagreement.  This is especially important seeing that the Council has
the final say on who is in the Team.  Why pick them if you are going to
be overruling them all the time.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to some constructive feedback.

Thank you Donnie for the work you have put in so far :)
-- 
gentoo-council@g.o mailing list


Replies:
Re: CoC enforcement proposal
-- Donnie Berkholz
References:
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: PMS
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.