Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Ferris McCormick <fmccor@g.o>
To: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] CoC round 2 (or is it 10? ;)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:33:27
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] CoC round 2 (or is it 10? ;) by Roy Bamford
1 Please note that in what follows I speak only for myself, but from the
2 perspective of a Devrel member concerned with Conflicts Resolution. I
3 explicitly do not speak for Devrel, nor have I reviewed what I say with
4 anyone in Devrel.
6 On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 17:22 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
7 > On 2007.10.14 13:39, Steve Long wrote:
9 === Large snip ===
11 > Steve,
12 >
13 > Some interesting points ... control of any written channel can only be
14 > passive, in the sense that controllers are always responding after the
15 > event. The possible exception is a moderated mailing list.
16 >
17 > How are passive and active defined in this context then?
18 > Passive would have to be the controllers wait for a complaint before
19 > acting and active would be the controllers work in as close to real
20 > time as the medium allows, on things they notice for themselves as
21 > happens in IRC and forums. They are always reactive regardless.
23 It was my understanding that this was one of the distinguishing points
24 between the Code of Conduct/Proctors and the existing Devrel structure.
25 It seems rather clear to me, at any rate, that the Code of Conduct is
26 normative: It lays out in general terms boundaries for acceptable *real
27 time* behavior in the various Gentoo communications media. The
28 Proctors, I believe, were established as a policing body for this
29 (recall my "traffic cop" analogy; I think it holds up). I would
30 consider this to be "active" control.
32 Contrast this with how Devrel policy reads. Devrel policy is pretty
33 clear; to quote from Policy, "Developer relations should only be
34 involved in a conflict when other attempts to solve the issue have
35 failed." Thus, except in extreme situations, by current policy Devrel
36 is explicitly NOT a "traffic cop." Devrel takes official notice when
37 someone "rings our bell" (to quote from IRC --- it's an in-joke). I
38 would consider this to be "passive" control.
40 Now, Council might not like it that way, but in my opinion (I speak for
41 myself here), we must live with the policy as it reads, not as how we
42 might like it to read. And, again speaking for myself again, I think
43 composition of Devrel reflects that: I have always been involved with
44 Conflicts Resolution and prefer to work as a mediator; I have little
45 interest in "policing" mailing lists or IRC.
47 > Most of the proctors actions were carried out in private, this seemed
48 > to work best since most people hate to be publicly asked to exercise
49 > restraint. We don't need a new project to continue this sort of
50 > activity, nor do we need to add to the scope of any existing project.
51 > Anyone can do it anytime. Curbing the worst excesses of friends is one
52 > of the things we can all do for one another. Continued poor behavior
53 > should be referred to the appropriate body in the normal way.
54 >
55 Absolutely. I'll metion that Devrel mediations are of necessity private
56 as well. A mediator holds a position of trust, and implicit in that is
57 that the mediator will not post private conversations will not on
58 bulletin boards. As for the rest of the statement, all I can do is
59 concur.
61 > The -dev mailing list seems to have calmed down since the proctors most
62 > public action, when a number of users had their posting rights
63 > suspended briefly. I'm unsure if the creation of -project played a big
64 > part in this or not. Judging by the number of posts to -project, I
65 > think its unlikely. I'm more inclined to believe that the bloodletting
66 > on that particular thread was something that everyone was aware of
67 > and nobody wanted to risk repeating. Thus the proctors served their
68 > purpose.
70 I think it's calmed down, too. I'll note that at the moment, from what
71 I've seen, Devrel (Conflicts) is getting very little "action" as well.
73 I'll use this as a vehicle to throw some oil onto the fire. There seems
74 to be a consensus for folding the old Proctor function into
75 Devrel/Userrel. Of course, this has some implications: Devrel, for
76 example, is structured to support it's policy as it is now. We can fold
77 the Proctor function into Devrel/Userrel, of course, but this has both
78 staffing implications and inter-group interaction implications.
79 Personally, I think we'd end up establishing the Proctors by another
80 name. What is the argument against just reestablishing the Proctors and
81 be done with it? Experience shows that however we do it, there will be
82 start-up problems as both the Code of Conduct comes better into focus
83 and people play with what does work and what does not. And
84 responsibility for the function should not lie with Council: we are
85 talking about a Gentoo Project (perhaps in Devrel/Userrel) meant to last
86 longer than any specific Council. Like it or not, individual Councils
87 are short term.
89 As Roy points out above, we actually do not need the Proctors by any
90 name if the community in general polices itself effectively. Indeed,
91 one of my goals as a Devrel mediator, or anyone's goals working in a
92 policing function, must be to establish an environment where the
93 function itself becomes unnecessary. I am not sure this is achievable,
94 but thus the ongoing discussion of Code of Conduct.
96 > Regards,
97 >
98 > Roy Bamford
99 > (NeddySeagoon)
100 > Is/was a member of
101 > gentoo-forums
102 > gentoo-ops
103 > gentoo-treecleaners
104 > gentoo-proctors
105 >
106 As always, comments, questions, suggestions welcome. Feel free to keep
107 pure flames to yourself. :)
109 Regards,
110 --
111 Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o>
112 Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc)


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
RE: [gentoo-project] CoC round 2 (or is it 10? ;) Chrissy Fullam <cfullam@×××××××.net>