1 |
On 02/03/19 06:53, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 11:22 PM desultory <desultory@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> On 02/02/19 08:41, Rich Freeman wrote: |
5 |
>>> |
6 |
>>> So far the proctors have mainly focused on areas like the |
7 |
>>> lists/bugzilla where productive Gentoo development occur which lack |
8 |
>>> any other moderation. When other moderation teams are already |
9 |
>>> creating a place for productive Gentoo work we haven't gotten as |
10 |
>>> involved yet, such as: |
11 |
>>> |
12 |
>>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1090810-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-50.html |
13 |
>>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1080592-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-25.html |
14 |
>>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1049438-start-0-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-.html |
15 |
>>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1091348.html |
16 |
>>> |
17 |
>> Four topics in an expressly off-topic forum, none of which were actually |
18 |
>> in the state that was claimed by the complainant, makes for a rather |
19 |
>> poor example of where proctors have not "gotten as involved yet". Given |
20 |
>> that there was nothing to get involved in. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> They simply illustrate that the code of conduct not really being applied. |
23 |
> |
24 |
No, at "worst" they illustrate that it is not being overly strictly |
25 |
enforced where it is specifically noted that is less strictly enforced. |
26 |
|
27 |
> The Code of Conduct simply states that it applies to Gentoo's "public |
28 |
> communication mediums." It makes no exceptions for forums that claim |
29 |
> to be off-topic. |
30 |
> |
31 |
Nor had I claimed that it did, I was pointing out that the cited topics |
32 |
were not apropos Gentoo while in a section that is expressly for, or at |
33 |
least allowing for, such discussions. They would indeed be inappropriate |
34 |
otherwise. |
35 |
|
36 |
> If we think that part of Gentoo's mission ought to be competing with |
37 |
> 4chan or whatever maybe it needs to be amended... |
38 |
> |
39 |
Given the claimed degree of effect that 4chan has had on global politics |
40 |
of late, there have been worse ideas suggested. ;) Though, in all |
41 |
seriousness continuing to provide a longstanding social area on the one |
42 |
platform, outside of the mailing lists, that Gentoo itself actually |
43 |
provides hardly seems to qualify as competing with 4chan in any regard, |
44 |
be it scale, tone, reach, or any other. |
45 |
|
46 |
>> |
47 |
>>> I'm not saying that we need some kind of mad rush to consolidate all |
48 |
>>> moderation activity (otherwise I'd be proposing this). |
49 |
>> |
50 |
>> CoC enforcement does not |
51 |
>> appear to be effectively implemented even in that limited scope; despite |
52 |
>> evident efforts to engage in scope creep. This is a distinctly |
53 |
>> concerning trend, as it rather strongly indicates that the current |
54 |
>> proctors project either cannot or will not actually undertake its |
55 |
>> mandate, while it seeks to expand its direct sphere of responsibility; |
56 |
> |
57 |
> Citation? |
58 |
> |
59 |
If you are seriously asking for it, I could compile some more obvious |
60 |
instances, though it would take some time as it would be a necessarily |
61 |
manual process. |
62 |
|
63 |
> I am speaking only for myself, not for proctors, and insofar as I'm |
64 |
> stating my own opinion so far I've said: |
65 |
> |
66 |
> 1. We shouldn't move to consolidate Forum/IRC moderators under Proctors. |
67 |
> |
68 |
I completely agree. |
69 |
|
70 |
> 2. Proctors shouldn't receive appeals from these teams, but that like |
71 |
> Proctors appeals ought to go to Comrel. |
72 |
> |
73 |
Again, I completely agree. Obviously, just to be explicit about it, with |
74 |
the group issuing the initial sanction being the first point of appeal. |
75 |
|
76 |
> How this suggests that Proctors is trying to increase its scope is |
77 |
> unclear to me. I personally agree that Proctors is still getting |
78 |
> re-established and should continue to focus more on areas lacking |
79 |
> moderation until processes/etc are better documented and are working |
80 |
> well in practice. |
81 |
> |
82 |
Comments about forum moderators and #gentoo ops being effectively |
83 |
proctors gave that distinct impression, my point is essentially that |
84 |
while the roles might serve largely the same purpose the have differing |
85 |
scope and there is historical justification for keeping it that way. |
86 |
|
87 |
> That said, the lists haven't been that terrible of late, certainly not |
88 |
> compared to years past. Proctors has generally been trying to avoid |
89 |
> issuing warnings for every sentence that is a bit snarky. |
90 |
> |
91 |
Both of those points are distinctly obvious, especially the former, |
92 |
mercifully so. |