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

Re: Conflict escalation and discipline

Well, this conversation that is very important and relevant for me,
reaches me in a bad moment. So expuse my slow replies, please.

On 18/04/18 17:17, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius writes ("Re: Conflict escalation and discipline"):
>> "Debian emotional support group", maybe.
> I find this suggestion very surprising, possibly even insulting.  At
> the very least I need to be much clearer.

I actually think that both your proposal, and the current a-h, serve a
role that can be described as emotional support, and there is nothing
insulting about that.

Emotional support is essential for a healthy community, sometimes just
having somebody to listen to your rant can help a lot towards solving

I am not saying that we are currently able to do this (no personpower!),
but I find it an important part of such an entity. For years I have been
parroting about the need to take care of Debian's most important assent:
its people. And I believe this is one very important way of doing so.

>> But maybe wait with the naming until there's a clear description of
>> what the group is reponsible for.

> This group would:

Except for a couple of things -and to the best of my knowledge- the
anti-harrassment team has been doing what you describe here, I will
comment below on the exceptions.

>    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.

Currently, the gatekeeper has the final say. I think that for DAM I
agree with Ganneff in that it makes sense it stays like this. Maybe you
could give more powers for less drastic actions, such as temporary bans
on certain media, etc.

>  * Write and publish guidelines for how to behave, how to complain,
>    and write down its own processes.

We have a Code of conduct, which goes a long way towards this.

>  * The new group would have a foundational document which would
>    explicitly give it authority to do all of the above.

This would be a delegation, I understand.

Martín Ferrari (Tincho)

Reply to: