| 1 |
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 11:19 -0500, Deedra Waters wrote: |
| 2 |
> Basically, for the most part, the transparency of how complaints are |
| 3 |
> handled stays the same. The only thing i really want to change, is that |
| 4 |
> i think that a commitee of say 3 to 5 people handles a complaint from |
| 5 |
> beginning to end. Basically, i think that this is much simpler, and the |
| 6 |
> devrel members i've mentioned it to seem to like this idea. The big |
| 7 |
> thing for most people is that what ever happens, the transparency needs |
| 8 |
> to stay, and i completely agree there. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> So, 1. I'd like to see some discussion over the next couple of days to |
| 11 |
> get feedback, and 2. I'd like to shoot for 1800 UTC on friday for a |
| 12 |
> meeting. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
My gut reaction to reading this proposal was no! While I can see a need |
| 15 |
for reducing the number of people involved with a complaint, I firmly |
| 16 |
feel that in order to ensure fairness in the complaint process that |
| 17 |
there needs to be checks and balances in place. The recent changes to |
| 18 |
split the investigative from the judical side of developer relations and |
| 19 |
make everything transparent as possible does much to accomplish this. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I strongly feel that moving back to a small committee would be a step |
| 22 |
backwards in that respect. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Regards, |
| 25 |
Paul |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list |
Archives