Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 13th March
On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 18:02 -0500, meg ford wrote: > Hi Germán, > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:33 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño > wrote: > > > On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 10:00 +, Allan Day wrote: > > > = Foundation Board Minutes for Tue, March 13th 2018, 18:00 UTC = > > > [...] > > > * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) > > > * There have been some complaints that mailing lists aren't > > > being > > > properly moderated - primarily unpleasant/toxic emails being > > > ignored > > > * There's no escalation process - what can people do if they > > > feel > > > they've been mistreated? > > > * There's no process for becoming a moderator or joining a > > > moderators team > > > * Questions: > > >* Would it be better to tackle this issue once we have a code > > > of > > > conduct? > > >* Is it the moderator's role to police behaviour, or is it > > > more of > > > an admin role? > > > * Rosanna - some moderators have taken a more active role in > > > the > > > past. > > > > FWIW, I am the administrator of the gtk-list, and my role has > > always > > been checking the queue of pending messages to the list. Some eons > > ago > > I requested to pass the list to the moderators team, with no > > response > > (AFAIU). > > > > When I stepped in, I think that was the role it was always expected > > for > > the list's "moderator". > > > > The thing is, I could barely moderate the behaviour in the list if > > I > > unsubscribed myself of such list several years ago (more than 5 or > > 6, > > for sure). Whenever I need to figure out something, I read (or > > search) > > the archives. > > > > My understanding is that many in the moderator team (or as it was > > originally proposed) did not need to be subscribed. Even more, it > > was a > > way for newcomers to get involved. > > > > During the board meeting no one mentioned the existence of a > moderator team. I don't think the current Board knows anything about > it. Can you point us to information about it (if any exists), or give > us some background (if there's no documentation)? Hi Meg, The Moderator Team started on January 2005, it seems the idea came from Ross Golder (IIRC, an active member of the Sysadmin Team back then): https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-infrastructure/2005-January/msg00 015.html It was announced to all mailing list owners: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/meld-list/2005-January/msg7.html And, as I said before, the idea also involved getting newcomers involved: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-love/2005-August/msg00017.html The team is listed among all other teams: https://wiki.gnome.org/Teams And the latest information available from the team is from 2010: https://wiki.gnome.org/ModeratorTeam I hope this helps. -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 13th March
Hi Germán, On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:33 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 10:00 +, Allan Day wrote: > > = Foundation Board Minutes for Tue, March 13th 2018, 18:00 UTC = > > [...] > > * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) > > * There have been some complaints that mailing lists aren't being > > properly moderated - primarily unpleasant/toxic emails being ignored > > * There's no escalation process - what can people do if they feel > > they've been mistreated? > > * There's no process for becoming a moderator or joining a > > moderators team > > * Questions: > >* Would it be better to tackle this issue once we have a code of > > conduct? > >* Is it the moderator's role to police behaviour, or is it more of > > an admin role? > > * Rosanna - some moderators have taken a more active role in the > > past. > > FWIW, I am the administrator of the gtk-list, and my role has always > been checking the queue of pending messages to the list. Some eons ago > I requested to pass the list to the moderators team, with no response > (AFAIU). > > When I stepped in, I think that was the role it was always expected for > the list's "moderator". > > The thing is, I could barely moderate the behaviour in the list if I > unsubscribed myself of such list several years ago (more than 5 or 6, > for sure). Whenever I need to figure out something, I read (or search) > the archives. > > My understanding is that many in the moderator team (or as it was > originally proposed) did not need to be subscribed. Even more, it was a > way for newcomers to get involved. > During the board meeting no one mentioned the existence of a moderator team. I don't think the current Board knows anything about it. Can you point us to information about it (if any exists), or give us some background (if there's no documentation)? Thanks, Meg ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 13th March
Hey Germán, thanks for your comments. Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: ... >> * Tile server options for Maps (Allan) ... >> * VOTE: approve $300 a month to pay Mapbox - passed unanimously >> * ACTION: Meg to inform Mapbox and the Maps team, cc'ing Rosanna >> and Neil >>* We might want to revisit this when we set future budgets > > From outside, and setting aside the quality of the product, it is hard > to asses whether this is a good decision or not. > > To do so, we would need to know what the recurrent income and expenses > are. It could be monthly or yearly. If we receive more than we spend, > then it might be a doable decision. Otherwise, we need think a better > long term solution. The cost will be capped at $300, which falls within the budget for the current financial year. Ongoing expenses will be factored into our routine financial planning, when we set the budget for each financial year. >> * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) ... >> * Allan - moderators will have to play a role in policing once we >> have a code of conduct - they are the ones who have the power to ban >> people. A code of conduct will require some procedures and agreements >> for how and when people get banned. > > By doing so, you will either need to recruit moderators or establish a > mechanism that an unsubscribed moderator get the message or complain. ... > What are you going to do if a core developer or a maintainer or the > list moderator is the one misbehaving? (other than talk to them) > > In practical terms, Code of conducts are guidelines, it shows what a > community aims; but Code of conducts are hard to enforce. ... You're absolutely right that procedures and guidelines will be required to deal with incident reports and to enforce a code of conduct. In that sense, a code of conduct isn't just a document that describes encouraged and prohibited behaviour, but is a framework for dealing with behavioural problems. You're right that it's a challenge, and there are a lot of details that will need to be worked out. One of those details is what role list moderators will have with regards to a code of conduct. Best, Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Foundation Board, 13th March
On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 10:00 +, Allan Day wrote: > = Foundation Board Minutes for Tue, March 13th 2018, 18:00 UTC = > [...] > == Minutes == > > * Tile server options for Maps (Allan) > * The board has previously discussed paying Mapbox to use their > tile > servers. Since then some cheaper alternatives have appeared. Our > current options: >1. Use OpenStreetMap's tile servers directly. This would be free, > but there aren't any satellite images. >2. tilehosting.com - costs $40 a month for their "vector" plan - > provides relatively low resolution satellite images. >3. Mapbox - costs about $300 a month (this would be capped) and > includes detailed satellite images. This cost falls within budget > tolerances. > * There is a Maps branch which allows these different options to be > used. The Maps developers are fine with any of them, but would like a > decision. > * Neil has talked to OpenStreetMap and they're OK with us using > their servers directly. > * Mapbox currently isn't providing Maps with tiles, so this is > somewhat urgent. > * Nuritzi - in favour of Mapbox, on the basis of quality > * Allan - no satellite images would be a major regression for Maps > * Neil - the quality of anything other than Mapbox is low > * VOTE: approve $300 a month to pay Mapbox - passed unanimously > * ACTION: Meg to inform Mapbox and the Maps team, cc'ing Rosanna > and Neil >* We might want to revisit this when we set future budgets From outside, and setting aside the quality of the product, it is hard to asses whether this is a good decision or not. To do so, we would need to know what the recurrent income and expenses are. It could be monthly or yearly. If we receive more than we spend, then it might be a doable decision. Otherwise, we need think a better long term solution. > * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) > * There have been some complaints that mailing lists aren't being > properly moderated - primarily unpleasant/toxic emails being ignored > * There's no escalation process - what can people do if they feel > they've been mistreated? > * There's no process for becoming a moderator or joining a > moderators team > * Questions: >* Would it be better to tackle this issue once we have a code of > conduct? >* Is it the moderator's role to police behaviour, or is it more of > an admin role? > * Rosanna - some moderators have taken a more active role in the > past. FWIW, I am the administrator of the gtk-list, and my role has always been checking the queue of pending messages to the list. Some eons ago I requested to pass the list to the moderators team, with no response (AFAIU). When I stepped in, I think that was the role it was always expected for the list's "moderator". The thing is, I could barely moderate the behaviour in the list if I unsubscribed myself of such list several years ago (more than 5 or 6, for sure). Whenever I need to figure out something, I read (or search) the archives. My understanding is that many in the moderator team (or as it was originally proposed) did not need to be subscribed. Even more, it was a way for newcomers to get involved. Anyhow, if someone in the gtk-list is giving a headache to anyone, drop me an email. > * Allan - moderators will have to play a role in policing once we > have a code of conduct - they are the ones who have the power to ban > people. A code of conduct will require some procedures and agreements > for how and when people get banned. By doing so, you will either need to recruit moderators or establish a mechanism that an unsubscribed moderator get the message or complain. > * Carlos - even if we don't have a code of conduct in place, there > might be other things we can do, like trying to recruit extra > modorators. The problem is, right now there's no process for > appointing moderators. > * The board isn't currently managing the mailing lists, but they > are > hosted on GNOME infrastructure and they do therefore fall under the > board's remit. > * Carlos - we should write a process for putting more people into > moderator and administratory roles. > * Nuritzi - we could put out a public call to find out if there are > any moderators who want help, or if anyone has had problems with a > list. > * Cosimo - would prefer to wait until we have a code of conduct. > Didier and Nuritzi too. Carlos is mindful that this topic is already > overdue. > * ACTION: add this item to ongoing items and check back in a month When there is lack of volunteers for a boring role, why would you need a process? Who are you going to recruit? What are you going to do if a core developer or a maintainer or the list moderator is the one misbehaving? (other than talk to them) In practical terms, Code of conducts are guidelines, it shows what a community aims; but Code of conducts are hard to enforce. The exception could be a gathering or conference. There is no balance in power. To put it simple:
Minutes of the Foundation Board, 13th March
= Foundation Board Minutes for Tue, March 13th 2018, 18:00 UTC = Next meeting date Tue, March 20th 2018, 18:00 UTC == Attending == * CarlosSoriano * AllanDay * CosimoCecchi * NuritziSanchez * MegFord * DidierRoche * NeilMcGovern * RosannaYuen == Regrets == * AlexandreFranke == Missing == == Agenda == * Tile server options for Maps (Allan) * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) * Using GitLab to track ongoing issues (Allan) * Time change for board meetings (Meg) Deferred until next week: * Role of the Executive Director and Director of Operations with regards to the Board == Minutes == * Tile server options for Maps (Allan) * The board has previously discussed paying Mapbox to use their tile servers. Since then some cheaper alternatives have appeared. Our current options: 1. Use OpenStreetMap's tile servers directly. This would be free, but there aren't any satellite images. 2. tilehosting.com - costs $40 a month for their "vector" plan - provides relatively low resolution satellite images. 3. Mapbox - costs about $300 a month (this would be capped) and includes detailed satellite images. This cost falls within budget tolerances. * There is a Maps branch which allows these different options to be used. The Maps developers are fine with any of them, but would like a decision. * Neil has talked to OpenStreetMap and they're OK with us using their servers directly. * Mapbox currently isn't providing Maps with tiles, so this is somewhat urgent. * Nuritzi - in favour of Mapbox, on the basis of quality * Allan - no satellite images would be a major regression for Maps * Neil - the quality of anything other than Mapbox is low * VOTE: approve $300 a month to pay Mapbox - passed unanimously * ACTION: Meg to inform Mapbox and the Maps team, cc'ing Rosanna and Neil * We might want to revisit this when we set future budgets * Moderation of public mailing lists (Carlos) * There have been some complaints that mailing lists aren't being properly moderated - primarily unpleasant/toxic emails being ignored * There's no escalation process - what can people do if they feel they've been mistreated? * There's no process for becoming a moderator or joining a moderators team * Questions: * Would it be better to tackle this issue once we have a code of conduct? * Is it the moderator's role to police behaviour, or is it more of an admin role? * Rosanna - some moderators have taken a more active role in the past. * Allan - moderators will have to play a role in policing once we have a code of conduct - they are the ones who have the power to ban people. A code of conduct will require some procedures and agreements for how and when people get banned. * Carlos - even if we don't have a code of conduct in place, there might be other things we can do, like trying to recruit extra modorators. The problem is, right now there's no process for appointing moderators. * The board isn't currently managing the mailing lists, but they are hosted on GNOME infrastructure and they do therefore fall under the board's remit. * Carlos - we should write a process for putting more people into moderator and administratory roles. * Nuritzi - we could put out a public call to find out if there are any moderators who want help, or if anyone has had problems with a list. * Cosimo - would prefer to wait until we have a code of conduct. Didier and Nuritzi too. Carlos is mindful that this topic is already overdue. * ACTION: add this item to ongoing items and check back in a month * Using GitLab to track ongoing issues (Allan) * Allan has sent a proposal to board-list, to replace the ongoing items section of the agenda with GitLab issues. * Neil - minutes should be minutes of a meeting, not an account of everything we've done. Significant updates should be on the agenda so they get minuted though. * We can have a public and a private project, in order to keep some issues private. * Only board and staff to be able to create issues. * GitLab admins will have access to our private issues, but that's no different from sysadmin level access. * Some open questions about responsibilities and policies, but everyone seems positive in general. * ACTION: Carlos and Neil to help Allan set it up * ACTION: Allan to write to foundation-list to inform the membership about the plan, once the details have been worked out * Time change for board meetings (Meg) * The meeting time is currently 1800 UTC. * The USA has moved to daylight savings. Europe hasn't. * We'll keep the time as it is, but change the UTC time once Europe has switched to DST. == Ongoing == '''This section includes items which have seen an update in the last 30 days. Format is "-MM-DD, action|discussion|abstract" for this and subsequent minutes sections''' * Laptop for European events box (Nuritzi) * We've had a message from Kat that we have some time if we want to try and get a lapt
