Re: Learning from FreeBSD's mistakes [and 1 more messages]
On Mon, 06 Feb 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This distributed approach has strengths (which Don points out) but it
> also has weaknesses. Principally, it means that though we advertise a
> single point of contact, that point of contact is mostly a go-between
> and support function for forum-specific teams;
The antiharassment team is the single publicly-advertised point of
contact, and (in theory) knows which teams are responsible for all of
the different communications channels and events. Many forums also
advertise a forum-specific point of contact which can take action more
rapidly.
> and it also makes it somewhat harder for us to respond to problems
> with span several communication channels or several events.
The few cases where we have had an individual which has been harassing
others which spanned multiple forums, at least listmaster@ and owner@
have been able to communicate fairly effectively and implement
consequences fairly rapidly.
Even if antiharassment@ was given the authority to establish
consequences directly, it would still require action of the teams in
question to enact those consequences.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Of course, there are cases where only a rare individual will have the
vision to perceive a system which governs many people's lives; a
system which had never before even been recognized as a system; then
such people often devote their lives to convincing other people that
the system really is there and that it aught to be exited from.
-- Douglas R. Hofstadter _Gödel Escher Bach. Eternal Golden Braid_
Reply to: