Re: [gentoo-project] Appeals of Moderation Decisions

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 11:22 PM desultory <desultory@g.o> wrote:
>
> On 02/02/19 08:41, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > So far the proctors have mainly focused on areas like the
> > lists/bugzilla where productive Gentoo development occur which lack
> > any other moderation.  When other moderation teams are already
> > creating a place for productive Gentoo work we haven't gotten as
> > involved yet, such as:
> >
> > https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1090810-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-50.html
> > https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1080592-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-25.html
> > https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1049438-start-0-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-.html
> > https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1091348.html
> >
> Four topics in an expressly off-topic forum, none of which were actually
> in the state that was claimed by the complainant, makes for a rather
> poor example of where proctors have not "gotten as involved yet". Given
> that there was nothing to get involved in.

They simply illustrate that the code of conduct not really being applied.

The Code of Conduct simply states that it applies to Gentoo's "public
communication mediums."  It makes no exceptions for forums that claim
to be off-topic.

If we think that part of Gentoo's mission ought to be competing with
4chan or whatever maybe it needs to be amended...

>
> > I'm not saying that we need some kind of mad rush to consolidate all
> > moderation activity (otherwise I'd be proposing this).
>
> CoC enforcement does not
> appear to be effectively implemented even in that limited scope; despite
> evident efforts to engage in scope creep. This is a distinctly
> concerning trend, as it rather strongly indicates that the current
> proctors project either cannot or will not actually undertake its
> mandate, while it seeks to expand its direct sphere of responsibility;

Citation?

I am speaking only for myself, not for proctors, and insofar as I'm
stating my own opinion so far I've said:

1.  We shouldn't move to consolidate Forum/IRC moderators under Proctors.

2.  Proctors shouldn't receive appeals from these teams, but that like
Proctors appeals ought to go to Comrel.

How this suggests that Proctors is trying to increase its scope is
unclear to me.  I personally agree that Proctors is still getting
re-established and should continue to focus more on areas lacking
moderation until processes/etc are better documented and are working
well in practice.

That said, the lists haven't been that terrible of late, certainly not
compared to years past.  Proctors has generally been trying to avoid
issuing warnings for every sentence that is a bit snarky.

-- 
Rich