On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:45:05AM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote: > I hope many of you will agree that while the CoC may be a necessary > feature for our community it should be governed in a transparent, > policy-driven and unbiased manner with detailed record keeping and > peer review. I agree with your general reasoning here. For mailing list bans, I think it's pretty straightforward to implement a mechanism that is up to the accountability requirements you ask for: just publish bans, as requested / discussed in [1]. I don't think we need anything more than that. With public bans one can review the actions of listmasters, without having to force them to provide elaborate reasoning (which, as Don pointed out, would be too bureaucratic with very little benefit, IMHO). If enough people in the project are against a specific listmaster action, they can resort to the usual mechanisms (e.g. a GR) to override listamsters. I understand that there are drawbacks in public bans, as Don pointed out as well. But as I've argued in [2] I think the benefits for the community of publishing them outweigh the drawbacks. For IRC it's a bit more difficult, because we do not long our IRC channels by default (or at least I'm not aware we do), with the exception of meetings run with the help of meetbot. That means that it would be rather difficult for the moderators to point out to the evidence on the basis of which they've banned someone. I can't help wondering if the solution to this shouldn't just be radical, i.e. publicly log our IRC channels. A less invasive solution is to just ask moderators to publish log excerpts that they think justify the ban. [1]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2013/10/threads.html#00090 [2]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2013/10/msg00124.html [3]: http://meetbot.debian.net/ Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature