1 |
I'd just like to point out that if comrel can terminate a developer's |
2 |
status...and if council supervises/takes appeals for comrel...and |
3 |
developers elect council... |
4 |
|
5 |
Then what we have here is a social feedback loop. In effect, comrel would |
6 |
be in a position to winnow out adverse opinions of people casting votes for |
7 |
council. |
8 |
|
9 |
is this actually happening? I don't know. But even as a theoretical |
10 |
possibility, it concerns me. And I've also heard disturbing rumors related |
11 |
to this...from multiple sources, not all of whom have made noise about it |
12 |
on the lists. |
13 |
|
14 |
|
15 |
On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:47 AM, M. J. Everitt <m.j.everitt@×××.org> wrote: |
16 |
|
17 |
> On 13/11/16 19:37, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
18 |
> > On Sunday, November 13, 2016 11:26:29 AM EST Alec Warner wrote: |
19 |
> >> What I think is actually true is that there are some risks the current |
20 |
> >> board sees, and they (we?, I am on the board after all) see one way to |
21 |
> >> reduce the risk is by this joining. I think we should also be open to |
22 |
> >> evaluating the risks and seeking other avenues to mitigate them. |
23 |
> >> |
24 |
> >> I think, speaking in general terms, one risk is the following. |
25 |
> >> |
26 |
> >> 1) When a community member feels harmed by the community, they can file |
27 |
> a |
28 |
> >> suit. They can sue individuals, or they can sue the Foundation. They |
29 |
> cannot |
30 |
> >> sue "Comrel" for example, because Comrel is not an entity. They can sue |
31 |
> the |
32 |
> >> individuals that compose comrel, or they can sue the Foundation. |
33 |
> >> |
34 |
> >> 2) If they sue the Foundation, we are worried that a 100% hands-off |
35 |
> >> solution is going to be an effective defense. In the current scheme, the |
36 |
> >> Foundation has no real control over the operation of Comrel. I think |
37 |
> there |
38 |
> >> is a lack of confidence that this defense is sufficient to dismiss a |
39 |
> suit |
40 |
> >> though. |
41 |
> >> |
42 |
> > A defamation suit is not out of the question if someone feels actions |
43 |
> taken |
44 |
> > against them have caused great harm to their reputation. |
45 |
> > |
46 |
> > For example; |
47 |
> > In my case being painted as an outcast could have implications in |
48 |
> obtaining |
49 |
> > jobs, etc. It would be interesting to see how a court would rule on |
50 |
> someones |
51 |
> > volunteer actions, perceived conduct by others, having effect on their |
52 |
> ability |
53 |
> > to make a living, Based on how others have made them out to be, an |
54 |
> outcast, |
55 |
> > etc, tarnishing their reputation publicly. |
56 |
> > |
57 |
> > Something many seem to ignore or overlook. Comrel or any action taken |
58 |
> against |
59 |
> > someone could have serious impacts on that individuals career. Their |
60 |
> ability |
61 |
> > to make a living, obtain jobs, contracts, etc. |
62 |
> > |
63 |
> And this is the point, why Gentoo has GOT to take this seriously .. |
64 |
> continuously brushing it under the carpet until someone suitably savvy |
65 |
> takes Gentoo to court . do we really want to actively ALLOW this to |
66 |
> happen?! |
67 |
> |
68 |
> Accepting that there is a problem, is the first step to solving it ..... |
69 |
> |
70 |
> |