Re: Expulsion process: Sven Luther - Decision
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:45:09AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] I think the route forward is to GR
> > changes to section 8.1, but I'm fairly sure that that will fail if I
> > lead it. With any luck, either a DAM or DPL will start the process
> > before I do.
> The DAMs already have the authority to make any decisions about someone's
> status as a Developer. I don't see any bugs in 8.1 of the constitution;
> these are the powers the DAMs *should* have, what needs to be changed?
I think the DAMs should have a more powerful role with a clearer
process definition, similar to those of the DPL, tech-ctte and
Secretary. That would mostly be consolidation of 8.1.2, a DAM
delegation and a NM framework, but I'd like to put up for approval the
ideas of a three-strikes disciplinary process, DAMs being appointed by
DDs not DPLs (suggested since at least 2001 AFAICT) and a different NM
system, as well as the process definition.
> If what you want is a different procedure, that doesn't need to be a
> constitutional amendment, just propose something and get it accepted by the
> DAMs themselves.
I feel that would perpetuate undesirable aspects of the current setup.
Anyway, this may be different for more well-respected DDs, but IIRC,
I've received no reply from DAMs to any emails in years. I don't see
how to develop something acceptable with no feedback channel.
Hope that explains,
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop maker,
developer of koha, debian, gobo, gnustep, various mail and web s/w.
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/