[gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it?

[Wulf C. Krueger]

On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote:
[Proctor system]
> a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as
> has been suggested?

Personally, I think we simply don't need the proctors. 

I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear 
guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and 
what not to but due to language barriers, cultural differences etc. it's 
difficult to judge.

Furthermore, where do we need them? The Forums are moderated by an, IMHO, 
excellent team. IRC is more or less self-moderated.
That basically leaves the mailinglists and among those, the only one that 
*might* arguably need supervision could be -dev.

Do we really need moderation on the list? Or could we just literally 
moderate ourselves instead? Could we try and succeed to be just ignore 
some flames instead of adding oil to the fire?

And even if we can't: We still have DevRel we can complain to. Yes, DevRel 
is for inter-developer conflicts but let's look back in the archives a 
bit - do we really need more than that? Most conflicts arise between 
active developers and, well, one active retired-dev. 

Do we really need an entire team for dealing with one former dev in case 
he goes too far? Or could we just agree to ignore him if he again behaves 
inappropriately (or what some of us *feel* might be inappropriate)?

When I first read the CoC I had just read about the entire Ciaran-incident 
on the respective bugs, Forums, mailinglists, blogs and many other 
sources. CoC, while not bad in itself, seemed (and still seems) to me 
like a "Lex Ciaran" - a document with that what I had just read clearly 
in mind and targetted at preventing it. 

While preventing it is a good goal in itself, writing a CoC based on an 
actual case which has only recently occurred, usually leads to this 
result and damages the whatever good intentions were involved because 
other people will see the similarities as well.

More than that, it puts a strain on those who are entrusted with enforcing 
the CoC because they will try, with the best motives, to prevent anything 
like that happening again. And they will do it, as the proctors stated 
themselves, pro-actively. 

The problem is, though: In an asynchronous communications medium, you 
simply cannot pro-actively do anything without bordering on what some 
like to call censorship. You can only *re*act in such a situation.

Even *trying* to act pro-actively will lead to unrest as we've only very 
recently seen it. If we accept my hypothesis of asynchronous 
communication and the implications I described, we come to the conclusion 
that reaction is the most likely way not to open Pandora's Box.

That leads back to DevRel. We have them to deal reactively with conflicts 
after a complaint by either party involved. I stated, that on the 
mailinglists, we mainly see inter-developer conflicts and those can be 
handled by DevRel. 

A small improvement to DevRel might be achieved, at least from what I've 
seen by reading lots and lots of DevRel bugs, by taking action on 
unfounded complaints, too. I'm speaking of trivial complaints, of course. 

If, after both sides were investigated properly, the complaining party is 
found to be exaggerating or too easily offended, disciplinary action 
should be taken against it. Of course, this should be done light-handedly 
but it should give the complaining party some time to learn from their 
mistake. Maybe this is what's already intended - it's just that I haven't 
found any examples. :)

I apologise for the long mail but I wanted to state clearly and without 
too much emotions why I think we don't need the proctors and why we 
should thank them for attempting to bring some order to the chaos and 
give up on the concept as a whole.

Best regards, Wulf