1 |
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:24 PM Matthew Thode |
2 |
<prometheanfire@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> I'm sure there are times where action may be |
5 |
> needed but what it sounds like is needed are more genral definitions of |
6 |
> what the relationship between groups should be (how to hand off a high |
7 |
> priority item for review/action). |
8 |
|
9 |
IMO the scope of each is fairly clear-cut, and the few times we've had |
10 |
to interact we already have a comrel liason on Proctors. We really |
11 |
only escalate serious repeat offenses/etc, and that basically just |
12 |
involves sending them a complaint (much as any dev might), and |
13 |
referencing what data we have (which is all public anyway, since |
14 |
Proctors only deals with specific incidents that happen in public, and |
15 |
not interpersonal issues in general). There will never be a case |
16 |
where a Comrel issue would get referred to Proctors, unless it was |
17 |
just misdirected from the start. If that were the case we'd just have |
18 |
them assign us a bug/etc or otherwise ping us. |
19 |
|
20 |
No harm in writing that down I suppose, but I'm not sure it is worth |
21 |
it since I don't see this particular aspect of either group as |
22 |
contentious. Neither group really has special standing with the other |
23 |
- when we refer issues to Comrel they basically go into a black hole |
24 |
as far as we're concerned - it would be between that dev and Comrel, |
25 |
since it wouldn't be a personal conflict issue from our standpoint. |
26 |
We could continue to take action on future incidents like we always |
27 |
would, and we don't have discretion to do permanent bans/etc. If |
28 |
Comrel issued a long-term ban then there would be no further incidents |
29 |
for us to deal with. |
30 |
|
31 |
While I'm not opposed to a single GLEP for Comrel plus Proctors (or |
32 |
maybe even lump QA in there - there are potentially some common |
33 |
elements like confirming leads), I'm not sure if that actually makes |
34 |
things simpler. IMO Comrel is more about dealing with people, and |
35 |
Proctors is more about dealing with their specific posts/etc without |
36 |
passing judgment on the individuals long-term fit in the community. |
37 |
Proctors actions are definitely not intended to be punitive even if |
38 |
they're bans - it is more about cooling down, bringing attention to |
39 |
the CoC, and so on, and all bans are relatively short and |
40 |
auto-reinstated with no further follow-up. We also generally have |
41 |
been avoiding being ban-heavy (well, aside from that spam a while ago) |
42 |
and I'd like to see guidelines published further explaining our goals. |
43 |
|
44 |
-- |
45 |
Rich |