Re: Conflict escalation and discipline
On 15011 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
> * Where appropriate, recommend action to: DAM, TC, listmaster, IRC
> operators, DPL. Information about the situation would be provided
> by the disputes team to the gatekeeper team; but the gatekeeper
> team would not be expected to make its own enquiries and would
> normally be expected to follow the recommendation.
Recommend an action, but the gatekeeper is expected to follow will in
practice turn out to be a "they took the decision, the rest must
follow". Not good at all, it basically merges the power of all
gatekeepers into one team.
And from past experience in my roles, multiple times over, I tell you
that the pressure and feelings around the actual "final action" is
nothing good, nothing one wants to give others.
Especially if you take DAM and as such membership in our community of
Developers it gets highly emotional and draining.
So i think there needs to be different ways of going on, depending on
what action. A "don't post on mailing lists for a while", or "please
refrain from uploading package XY", even technically enforced, is way
different to "goodbye DD state, come back in 3 years and we see if you
behave better".
Let this new team make a summary of what the problem is, what they tried
(and maybe how they see it fail) and then invoke "the higher body", but
let that higher body decide on the action. For stuff like list bans or
upload bans that may well be just a "right, do it".
Obviously when that team goes to one of the gatekeepers it is expected
they tried all the usual "easy" actions of trying to solve the problems
at hand already, and the gatekeeper shouldnt redo all of those steps.
--
bye, Joerg
Reply to: