Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests

[Nikolaus Rath]

On May 11 2017, Russ Allbery  wrote:
> Nikolaus Rath  writes:
>> On May 10 2017, Russ Allbery  wrote:
>
>>> and no conclusions should ever be drawn from it?
>
>> I don't think anyone has said that.
>
> Quoting from the originally proposed wiki page:
>
> | The following people have added themselves to this list. No-one should
> | assume that the presence or absence of a person from this list implies
> | any conflict of interest or misconduct within Debian.

I read that to mean that just because someone is listed on this page he
doesn't necessarily have a conflict of interest. But if you have a
specific issue in mind that you'd like to get resolved, you are welcome
to use the page to figure out who may have a conflict of interest and
take that into account.


Best,
-Nikolaus

-- 
GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F

 »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«

Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests

[Ian Jackson]

Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes ("Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests"):
> That said, I still think that there are situations in which declaring one's 
> conflicts of interest _does_ matter, but I do expect the affected individual 
> to 
> either explcitly retract (or stay away) from the discussion, or declare the 
> conflict of interest at that point.

I try to always declare any conflict of interest I have (or may appear
to have) in a particular situation.  Where the interest is my
employer, I try to use my work email address (badness of email system
permitting).

Ian.

Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:10:39PM +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> Also, I suspect that anyone that might be tempted to misbehave as a
> result of CoI will not have filled in their entry anyway, which makes me
> wonder what useful purpose this could serve beyond a virtue signalling
> opportunity.

I usually see "virtue signalling" used pejoratively but that accurately
describes my motivations, at least. The intention is simply transparency,
and some of the (limited) feedback I've seen from the wider Debian community
suggests that this has been well received in some quarters. Having said that,
I appreciate the robust discussion in this thread and there's definitely more
refinement to do.


-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests

[Didier 'OdyX' Raboud]

Le mardi, 9 mai 2017, 09.16:21 h CEST Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
> However in the interests of transparency I feel that a voluntary, opt-in
> "Register of Interests" is a good idea for the project. I feel that such a
> list (populated) would demonstrate the transparency and openness that are
> part of our project's values.

I disagree that is is such a good idea, for a specific (and not yet mentionned) 
reason: conflicts of interest are _very_ much situational, _especially_ in the 
Debian context.

Assuming a hypothetical Debian contributor with financial interests in a hotel 
business, part-time software engineer and affiliated to a political party: not 
all three connections matter in all Debian work, or discussions. The first 
might matter though iff people start considering paying for accomodation in 
hir hotel; the second might matter in a discussion about a piece of software 
they are paid to work on, and the latter might matter when discussing the 
Debian project's eventual reaction to a complicate situation somewhere in the 
world. But these only matter in specific discussions, not constantly.

Where I'm going to is that I feel we're much better in a situation where we 
don't load all our conversations with references to _all_ our "real-life" 
interests. It opens the floodgates to interpret any position under the light of 
these interests, neglecting the mere idea that for plenty (if not all) of 
Debian interactions, we are genuinely acting as independent individuals.

That said, I still think that there are situations in which declaring one's 
conflicts of interest _does_ matter, but I do expect the affected individual to 
either explcitly retract (or stay away) from the discussion, or declare the 
conflict of interest at that point.

-- 
OdyX