Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: desultory <desultory@g.o>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Cc: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Appeals of Moderation Decisions
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 05:06:07
Message-Id: 2ff6b8ef-5742-b683-f58b-64546943270c@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Appeals of Moderation Decisions by Rich Freeman
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.