Hi Teemu On 2020/04/17 00:00, Teemu Hukkanen wrote: > Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> writes: > The emails in question have been forwarded to both Sam and Jonathan. > As you have noted, DebConf Committee members already received these > emails. Thanks, I received it and replied to it, and after reading this mail along with that one, I think I understand your request better. > We now have the following information: > > - An (all-round) organiser did not know Perhaps a misunderstanding on your part, but an all-rounder in terms of DebConf organisation isn't necessary involved in everything, they typically pick up slack where necessary and try to be helpful to everyone else in the team. It would probably be quite normal in future cases that all-rounder people wouldn't know about these kind of incidents. > - The DebConf Committee did not know > - The DPL did not know These I think were a lot more problematic. There were also some DebConf related problems that exacerbated the situation. The DebConf committee was formed half-way into the DC17 cycle (in January 2017), and at the time was overwhelmed by another harassment issue where there were lots of meetings and time demands. Because of this, the local team didn't really know yet how to interact with the DCC and at times they even said that they felt alone, it took a while to fix the DCC / DC-17 team relationship as well, there was just a lot going on during this time. It's unfortunate that the timing for your incident was during a perfect storm of existing problems. In DebConf, a local team has every right to block any person for whichever reason they see fit. This is unlikely to change in the future, although I do agree that there should be some due process and at least the DCC should be kept in the loop because that's the best place to preserve some institutional knowledge on these matters. > Which leaves the (local) organising committee. > > This returns us to the original query: """ > How would you handle a situation where a Debian event planning team > would instigate a unilateral blacklisting against a DD for a Debian > event, and the team would refuse to provide any details or > explanation, even at the request of the DPL at the time? > """ As I mentioned above, the Debian event planning team has every right to make such a unilateral blacklisting, and I don't think that's going to change any time soon. Ultimately it's the organisers of an event who has the most control and responsibility to make sure that the attendees are safe, and they get to make the ultimate decision. I do agree that they also have a responsibility to share this information with the DCC in the case of DebConfs, or the DPL or Community Team when it comes to other DebConf events. This would help provide some additional sanity checks and also for posterity. -Jonathan -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jcc> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature