[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GR proposal: code of conduct

On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:

> 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.
With my experience of the last weeks, I can just say: without me. I won't
public those bans in the public, if someone else wants to do that: feel free,
but please don't count on me.


Attachment: pgpbczpe5JOTu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: