| 1 |
M. J. Everitt wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> So, how many readers would feel 'better' about the situation if the |
| 4 |
> process was actually more Balanced .. that there was some form of |
| 5 |
> 'defence' as Chi puts it. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Note that I am not calling for introducing a defense. It would be one |
| 8 |
way to address the concerns voiced in this discussion, but that can be |
| 9 |
achieved in different ways too. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Actually what I would like to see most is a yearly critical review of |
| 12 |
ComRel activities by elected community members. This was suggested |
| 13 |
elsewhere in this discussion already. These reviewers should get full |
| 14 |
access to ComRel records and try hard to poke holes into everything that |
| 15 |
ComRel did that year. They then release their findings in a public |
| 16 |
summary, and provide a detailed report to Council. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The rest of the year the reviewers could be on standby, or their group |
| 19 |
disbanded, etc. Such details would need to be worked out in a formal |
| 20 |
proposal. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> I think there is definitely merit in some form of 'mediation' project or |
| 23 |
> sub-project or some-such function in Gentoo, that can act to resolve |
| 24 |
> interpersonal conflicts that may occur from cultural and/or language |
| 25 |
> differences between people, before they need referral to ComRel. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
If you look at Project:ComRel in the wiki, you will find "mediation" |
| 28 |
mentioned many times. I would support such a project only if it turns |
| 29 |
out that ComRel declined to include mediation in cases where it was |
| 30 |
called for by policy. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Best regards, |
| 34 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
Archives