Le lun. 05 sept. 2011 18:39:23 CEST, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> a écrit :
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Hagar Delest<hagar.del...@laposte.net> wrote:
2) We need to develop a privacy policy for the Forums, also to be
reviewed by the PPMC and Apache legal
I mean site privacy policy, meaning what information (cookies, etc.)
and personally identifying information you track for registered users
as well as casual visitors to the website. This can sometimes be part
of the Terms of Use document, but it is often in its own document.
I assume you agree with this and your -1 was due to a misunderstanding.
OK.
6) Being listed as an "admin" or "moderator" on a public-facing Apache
...
-1. Same as Zoltan. Except if admins and moderators are PPMC themselves.
They are the ones who monitor the forum, know the users by reading their
posts and how they react.
So you want to continue picking your own admins and moderators,
without ever consulting or reviewing these choices with the PPMC?
I'm not sure that is really compatible with the idea of a project-wide
meritocracy. You do a disservice to your own volunteers if you do not
bring them to the PPMC, show their valued contributions and allow this
to be recognized. Regardless of language, you should be able to say,
in a sentence or two, what the volunteers have contributed, etc. This
is a key role for all PPMC members, to be on the watch for future
Committers and PPMC members. So I'm not sure your approach is really
in the best long term interest of the project.
Read my comment: if current admins/mods are part of the PPMC then OK.
Who has the merit here? Isn't it the current staff that runs the forum for 4
years?
What if we started with the admins?
7) Future grants of admin/moderator rights would require a proposal to
ooo-dev seeking lazy consensus. Such a proposal could originate from
a forum volunteer or could originate from anyone on ooo-dev. This is
no different than someone asking to be a moderator for a mailing list.
-1. Same as above.
And for me, same as above. I think this goes against a project-wide
meritocracy.
Same as above, who has the merit?
Hagar
