1 |
On Saturday 23 June 2007 14:29, Wulf C. Krueger wrote: |
2 |
> "E. [Proctors/Devrel] determine recruiting needs and recruit to achieve |
3 |
> them." |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Members of an institution that is supposed to impose disciplinary action |
6 |
> on Gentoo devs and others should not be recruited but elected. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Otherwise their authority will be challenged all the time. Elected members |
9 |
> will have at least a *bit* more autority. |
10 |
> |
11 |
Agreed; the term mandate is often used to denote elected authority, and the |
12 |
fact that one is elected implies that one is there to represent the interests |
13 |
of the electors, not one own's personal agenda. |
14 |
|
15 |
> "There is no option to think about it --- either make a stop or let it |
16 |
> go." |
17 |
> |
18 |
> That's a rather bad idea - no option to think about how to handle a |
19 |
> situation? If I were cynical, I'd say that's what got you into the |
20 |
> current situation. ;) |
21 |
> |
22 |
> "They [Proctors] work "real time"" |
23 |
> |
24 |
> That'll lead to rushed (and therefore potentially wrong) decisions. |
25 |
> |
26 |
Well, I read this more to mean that proctors are there in the same way as |
27 |
forum or irc moderators, to keep the discussion civil and on-topic. As such, |
28 |
they have to react fairly quickly, and it has to be clear that they have the |
29 |
authority to do so. |
30 |
|
31 |
This is not the same as not thinking about how to handle a situation. Firstly, |
32 |
experience helps one to know what the right thing to do is. Secondly, teams |
33 |
of moderators tend to discuss ongoing situations as and when they happen. New |
34 |
moderators learn from the experienced ones in action and discussion. And |
35 |
policy-making has been transparent and inclusive, since comments were invited |
36 |
on the Code of Conduct, which was taken from the existing Social Contract |
37 |
iirc, right from the start. |
38 |
|
39 |
> IMO, we don't need proctors but if the proctors are kept, they should work |
40 |
> on a comlaint basis, too. Suppose both parties come from "Czamistan" - |
41 |
> they both know "big-balled goat lover" is not an insult but a |
42 |
> compliment - why should proctors react? |
43 |
> |
44 |
Well if the audience were all from country X it wouldn't matter. Expecting |
45 |
people to conform to acceptable language in an international forum seems |
46 |
reasonable, even desirable. As noted before, the proctor would simply get in |
47 |
touch to explain that the language could be mis-construed. If the person |
48 |
didn't like that, they'd probably need to adjust for interaction with the |
49 |
community. And better to help them to do that early on imo. |
50 |
|
51 |
> Suppose I come from Germany (which I do :-) ) and am being called |
52 |
> a "big-balled goat lover" - if you could see me, you'd witness me roaring |
53 |
> with laughter. Even though I don't know what "Czamistan" is and that this |
54 |
> is meant to be a compliment. Many people can, btw, read between the lines |
55 |
> and understand what is actually meant. :-) |
56 |
> |
57 |
Yes, but you'd have been wrong in this hypothetical situation. You'd have |
58 |
taken it as a joke, when it was a sincerely-meant compliment. Another might |
59 |
take it as an insult, with worse consequences for harmonious interaction. And |
60 |
believe me, someone laughing in your face when you are being serious is not |
61 |
much fun. |
62 |
|
63 |
> We don't a big brother watching us - we can decide for ourselves if we're |
64 |
> offended or not. If we are, we can either complain to DevRel (if the |
65 |
> other party is a dev) or, if the proctors are kept, to proctors. |
66 |
> |
67 |
Hmm. Thing is, by that stage people have normally got their heckles up. There |
68 |
is an audience, so tension is heightened. Putting out brush-fires is easier |
69 |
than dealing with a forest-fire. |
70 |
|
71 |
> Without proctors, we can simply ignore non-dev offenders. We may have to |
72 |
> deal with other devs but there's no obligation to interact with certain |
73 |
> users. |
74 |
> |
75 |
None at all. It's a shame more of you don't just ignore certain non-devs, |
76 |
instead of appearing so stringent with their humour, yet so callous with your |
77 |
own. (By your, I do not mean you specifically, of course.) Other non-devs |
78 |
seem to pursue political agendas and are never even questioned. The thing is, |
79 |
these aren't what people signed up for. Proctors did, albeit reluctantly (one |
80 |
would hope.) |
81 |
|
82 |
IMO they haven't even been allowed to start; the first time they intervened, |
83 |
only asking for a 24 hour mute on ONE thread, a Council member denigrated the |
84 |
entire project. How this is supposed to facilitate their work is quite beyond |
85 |
me, as is why the Council member never discussed his concerns with the team |
86 |
established by the Council to sort out long-standing issues. The Council's |
87 |
silence on this (unless I have missed something, of course) does not reflect |
88 |
well on them, to this external observer. |
89 |
|
90 |
> "and after some conditioning", "re-orientation" and some other terms used |
91 |
> in either or both documents. |
92 |
> |
93 |
> I'm sorry and maybe it comes from the cultural differences but, honestly, |
94 |
> to me this sounds like we're going to have "re-education camps" for |
95 |
> the "misguided". |
96 |
> |
97 |
It does sound unfortunate I agree. I think the author is not an |
98 |
English-speaker, and is trying to discuss cultural change. And from your |
99 |
email, and prior discussion, there appears to be a consensus that there is a |
100 |
need for cultural change. |
101 |
|
102 |
I hope things get better, and thanks for a great distro; it makes my life a |
103 |
lot easier! :-) |
104 |
|
105 |
Regards, |
106 |
Ranjit Singh. |
107 |
-- |
108 |
gentoo-proctors@g.o mailing list |