Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:48:04PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: For IRC it's a bit more difficult, because we do not long our IRC channels by default (or at least I'm not aware we do), with the exception of meetings run with the help of meetbot. That means that it would be rather difficult for the moderators to point out to the evidence on the basis of which they've banned someone. I can't help wondering if the solution to this shouldn't just be radical, i.e. publicly log our IRC channels. A less invasive solution is to just ask moderators to publish log excerpts that they think justify the ban. Indeed, that's an issue - but I always have logs anyway. Proactively publishing bans on IRC may produce quite a bit of mail, as these tend to be more frequent than mailing list bans. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:45:05AM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote: I hope many of you will agree that while the CoC may be a necessary feature for our community it should be governed in a transparent, policy-driven and unbiased manner with detailed record keeping and peer review. I agree with your general reasoning here. For mailing list bans, I think it's pretty straightforward to implement a mechanism that is up to the accountability requirements you ask for: just publish bans, as requested / discussed in [1]. I don't think we need anything more than that. With public bans one can review the actions of listmasters, without having to force them to provide elaborate reasoning (which, as Don pointed out, would be too bureaucratic with very little benefit, IMHO). If enough people in the project are against a specific listmaster action, they can resort to the usual mechanisms (e.g. a GR) to override listamsters. I understand that there are drawbacks in public bans, as Don pointed out as well. But as I've argued in [2] I think the benefits for the community of publishing them outweigh the drawbacks. With my experience of the last weeks, I can just say: without me. I won't public those bans in the public, if someone else wants to do that: feel free, but please don't count on me. Alex pgpazEkv7zTu5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:25:17PM +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote: With my experience of the last weeks, I can just say: without me. I won't public those bans in the public, if someone else wants to do that: feel free, but please don't count on me. FWIW, please note that (at least for me): publishing != announcing. I think that bans should be made public --- as in: there exists a public web page where bans currently in effect are listed. It does not follow from that that listmasters should mail some public list each time that page is updated. In fact, I do think that sending announcements about new/changed bans is a bad idea, that it reinforces the drawbacks of publishing bans, and that it gives us nothing in terms of additional transparency. Imho it is not a good idea to publish those bans at all. Ideally, the maintenance of that page could be fully automated, on top of the tools you already use to manage bans. there are no tools. Alex pgpzrNSiPyDDV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Alexander Wirt wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:25:17PM +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote: With my experience of the last weeks, I can just say: without me. I won't public those bans in the public, if someone else wants to do that: feel free, but please don't count on me. FWIW, please note that (at least for me): publishing != announcing. I think that bans should be made public --- as in: there exists a public web page where bans currently in effect are listed. It does not follow from that that listmasters should mail some public list each time that page is updated. In fact, I do think that sending announcements about new/changed bans is a bad idea, that it reinforces the drawbacks of publishing bans, and that it gives us nothing in terms of additional transparency. Imho it is not a good idea to publish those bans at all. Agreed. It will serve no purpose but to put everyone at risk [of legal actions] and extra nuisances. We can have a private location with this data which only DDs can access for governance purposes, if required (and I *do not* think it is required at all). -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140213162728.ga12...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
I'd be happy to sponsor a resolution that simply adopted the COC as a position statement of the day and asked the appropriate parties to take that as the project's current position. I think the DPL and listmasters can figure out where on the website to put it, and can figure out how to evolve it. If what we're trying to say is that today, her and now, this is what we believe, then let's just say that. So, my preference is to keep the COC inline and lose all the text about where it goes or how its updated. Just say it's our position statement at time of adoption. to me that explicitly lets existing normal processes evolve it. --Sam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/01442c248729-332334d9-a029-49f3-b1cb-aaaf16abba2a-000...@email.amazonses.com
CENSO DE LIGNUXEROS
Te he invitado a rellenar el formulario CENSO DE LIGNUXEROS. Para rellenarlo, visita: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pCBzocCB7ZCtNC-2X32ohVdUtR-MUXKRgWTR7-FhSpc/viewform
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
Sam Hartman writes (Re: GR proposal: code of conduct): I'd be happy to sponsor a resolution that simply adopted the COC as a position statement of the day and asked the appropriate parties to take that as the project's current position. I think the DPL and listmasters can figure out where on the website to put it, and can figure out how to evolve it. If what we're trying to say is that today, her and now, this is what we believe, then let's just say that. So, my preference is to keep the COC inline and lose all the text about where it goes or how its updated. Just say it's our position statement at time of adoption. to me that explicitly lets existing normal processes evolve it. At the very least it doesn't do so _explicitly_. You are really saying that it does so implicitly. I think it is better to be explicit. That will save us future argument if the DPL says they are amending the CoC and someone objects on the grounds that it ought to go through another GR. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21245.379.679178.633...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org wrote: Agreed. It will serve no purpose but to put everyone at risk [of legal actions] and extra nuisances. We can have a private location with this data which only DDs can access for governance purposes, if required (and I *do not* think it is required at all). I feel we are also at risk when there is a lack of policy and proper documentation. A ban, especially a long term ban on a DD, is a strong statement against the character of a person even when not advertised publicly. In the physical world, it is as if you barred someone from entering a clubhouse. Friends inside will wonder what the person did to deserve the treatment and potentially make up stories. People working with them may lose confidence in any effort they are collaborating on. It is not necessary to put a sign on the door that says So and so is not allowed even though that is obviously worse. If the policy for barring entry is understood by everyone in advance then participation in the club is effectively consent in the governing policy. This is still true for a policy of don't upset the list masters or they will throw you out but such a policy leaves a great deal of personal responsibility on the behavior police. To me, policy and documentation are a shield that decreases legal risk rather than increasing it. I'd hate to be a football referee if there were no rules. IANAL. I support the CoC GR. I accept the position that the GR represents a codification of status quo rather than the generation of new policy. I would love to see additional clarity around the rules and the record keeping because this policy (the CoC) is definitely going to cause hard feelings at some future date and I think clarity is a guard against that. Russ has expressed quite clearly how process protects us in prickly scenarios. I will vote for the CoC GR in its current form but with the reservations I've noted. I just wanted to get my opinion out there so that I can say I told you so when things go terribly wrong. Ha, ha. Just kidding. Still an acceptable email? Too much comedy? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3507416.22421392315930297.javamail.r...@newmail.brainfood.com
Re: Re: Donations to Debian are too difficult
I want to how I can donate Dabian Proyect per paypal..., please... Thanks, Gisi
Debian Services Census
Hi, We've just started the Debian Services Census and we'd like *you* to participate in it. The Debian Services Census is an attempt to gather detailed information about software services for the Debian community. It doesn't matter where these services live or who provides them. For now we are only interested in their existence. Services can be anything from the mail forwarding service for @debian.org addresses that lives on master.debian.org operated by DSA, web applications, email bots, command line scripts you can run on debian.org machines, automated package checkers that report bugs to people, Debian-related services that people run on their own infrastructure like screenshots.debian.net and son on. Have a look at https://wiki.debian.org/Services for more examples. If you think it's a service, then we think it's a service too and we want to know about it. Feel free to contribute data whether you are the maintainer of that service or not. Here is how to let us know about the service: - please visit https://wiki.debian.org/Services and verify if the service is already listed there - if the service you had in mind is *not* listed, please create an entry for it using the Add a new service button. If you are the maintainer of a service, we also encourage you to subscribe to the debian-services-ad...@lists.debian.org mailing list, which is a low-traffic list and should be the contact point for inter-service communication and coordination. Best regards, zobel enrico -- Martin Zobel-Helas zo...@debian.orgDebian System Administrator Debian GNU/Linux Developer Debian Listmaster http://about.me/zobel Debian Webmaster GPG Fingerprint: 6B18 5642 8E41 EC89 3D5D BDBB 53B1 AC6D B11B 627B signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: Donations to Debian are too difficult
Hi, Per http://www.spi-inc.org/donations/, PayPal donations may be made through Network For Good: https://www.networkforgood.org/donation/ExpressDonation.aspx?ORGID2=11-3390208 Thanks! Luca On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:39:51PM +0100, Gisela Neira wrote: I want to how I can donate Dabian Proyect per paypal..., please... Thanks, Gisi -- Luca Filipozzi http://www.crowdrise.com/SupportDebian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140213223734.ga22...@emyr.net
