On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 05:19:27PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: >On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:19:46AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> > * The communication of soc-ctte members with people about their >> > behaviour which might eventually become a matter of committee >> > deliberation should be kept reasonably private, to prevent >> > unnecessary escalation >> >> Basicaly, any communication concerning the "proactive" part shall be >> private. The person receiving the warning can publicize it by themselves >> if they so desire (but it's certainly not expected to be the general rule, >> it's just to avoid the criticism of lack of transparency). > >One thing that I hadn't had the chance to mention (because other people were >simply being louder than me ;) was that the "proactivity" still needs to be >documented in an internal archive of soc-ctte, so that there is a clear >record of exactly what was done in the name of the committee and when. >That is - whenever someone takes such a private action, they don't Cc: the >public mailing list, but they do Cc: the private archiving alias which >quietly records the event. Yup. I made a point of mentioning this private archive at the meeting, but we were quite busy and maybe not everybody heard/remembered it. >This archive would obviously be useful for the simple purpose of >backtracking what went on in case someone complains; but at the same time >it would be a bare-bone teaching tool for new members of soc-ctte. Yes, absolutely. <snip> >> So we sort of decided that it should: >> - make ACL decisions concerning the Debian lists (the listmasters clearly >> indicated that they don't want to take those by themselves) >> This includes the possibility to decide ML bans for DD as well as >> for non-DD. > >One thing we didn't mention here was any documented limits to these >decisions. I guess everyone implied that this would be left to the >discretion of soc-ctte, hoping that they wouldn't do anything drastic. Yes, that was my understanding. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. firstname.lastname@example.org We don't need no education. We don't need no thought control.
Description: Digital signature