| 1 |
On 13/10/16 12:12, M. J. Everitt wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/10/16 13:35, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 3 |
>> NP-Hardass wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On 10/11/2016 06:22 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> Again in a court, if policies and procedures are not followed, a |
| 6 |
>>>> person cannot |
| 7 |
>>>> be prosecuted, nor can that ruling withstand. |
| 8 |
>>> Then go to council and appeal. In a court, if policies and procedures |
| 9 |
>>> aren't followed, it is on the defendant to bring suit against the |
| 10 |
>>> plaintiff to assert that their rights were violated. Go file your |
| 11 |
>>> appeal already... |
| 12 |
>> NeddySeagoon and Nick Vinson already pointed this out, but let me |
| 13 |
>> repeat this again: ComRel does not operate like a court. Someone who |
| 14 |
>> is subject to ComRel punishment does not get to see the evidence or |
| 15 |
>> learn who is the accuser. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Even if that person later appeals to Council, there is an imbalance. |
| 18 |
>> There is a "prosecution" (ComRel) and neutral "judges" (Council) but |
| 19 |
>> not any kind of defense. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> There may be good reasons for all of that, but let's not pretend that |
| 22 |
>> this is like a court in any way. |
| 23 |
> <snip> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I think Chi-Thanh has stumbled upon the crux of the problem as perceived |
| 26 |
> by a few people in this thread. It's not that there is so much a failure |
| 27 |
> in procedure or policy .. its the implementation and basic conceptual aims. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> So, how many readers would feel 'better' about the situation if the |
| 30 |
> process was actually more Balanced .. that there was some form of |
| 31 |
> 'defence' as Chi puts it. I'm not saying I have any idea how this may be |
| 32 |
> implemented, but from what I've seen, there hasn't even been any |
| 33 |
> opportunity *whatsoever* for the accused to explain or (attempt to) |
| 34 |
> justify their actions. This does give the impression that the process is |
| 35 |
> broken, as it acts in a totally one-sided way, and I can easily see that |
| 36 |
> I, too, wouldn't want to be caught on the wrong side of it, as everybody |
| 37 |
> points out, there is no ultimate recourse once things have gone 'over |
| 38 |
> the edge'. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> I think there is definitely merit in some form of 'mediation' project or |
| 41 |
> sub-project or some-such function in Gentoo, that can act to resolve |
| 42 |
> interpersonal conflicts that may occur from cultural and/or language |
| 43 |
> differences between people, before they need referral to ComRel. Again, |
| 44 |
> no particular ideas on how/where this should reside or be implemented, |
| 45 |
> just that it might serve to to early resolution before problems |
| 46 |
> escalate. Thus not requiring ComRel to get involved, or severe actions |
| 47 |
> to be taken in lieu of any other methods being available/tried. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> Apologies for the mangled articulation ... looks like I need a coffee .. :P |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
Random follow-up thought .. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
How about appeals called the accused to answer to Council as well as |
| 54 |
ComRel .. would that ever work!? |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
[no, don't go flaming me down on this one .. !] |
Archives