On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 08:52:53AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Saturday 11 March 2006 03:27, Kevin Mark wrote: > [DPL as mediator] > > The DPL already could do that. The DPL probably in the past *did* step in > in some cases behind the scenes. There's no reason for the technical > overhead of a mediator@ email alias - there's leader, and people who trust > the DPL to be able to mediate conflicts can reach him there. > > Mediation can only work if all parties accept the mediator as a person of > respect/authority who is capabable of working out a fair solution and > accept that a mediator will help. Otherwise, it'll be just an additional > party in the debate - no win. > > > After the meeting everyone would agree to not discuss anything in public > > and only redress further problems by arranging another private irc > > session. > > Hmm. I agree with you that solving these problems is behind the scenes > work. But I think a solution worked out by a mediator ought to be > published, because often enough the problem is also the subject of frequent > discussions and flamewars, often also between people not actually involved > in the problem (and thus the mediation.) Mediation is about finding a > solution, not about blaming anybody, so publication of the mediation's > result should be constructive instead of 'he was guilty'. Hi Adrian, I would agree as long as the statement is worded to both parties agreement. Would it also be useful to start a parallel document to 'Debian [technical] Policy' to address possible future situations or would it make sense to have one policy document and add a section? cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and | | `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature