[gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:30:41 -0400: > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 09:28 +, Duncan wrote: >> If it's not correct, that they are staff and /not/ devs, therefore >> /not/ eligible for council, then I've misunderstood. Apologies for the >> noise. > > Staff are "devs" and are eligible for the Council just as much as Infra > are "staff" and eligible for the Council. Thanks. That was my understanding as well, but it's good to have a solid statement on it. (The reason I brought it up you addressed elsewhere.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:23:31 -0400: > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 04:35 +, Duncan wrote: >> * "If you perceive a breach of the Code of Conduct guidelines, let the >> proctors know." How? [N]o general proctor address is listed. > > We had no such alias made, but I'm requesting it to be done. I'll > update the document accordingly once we have the alias. > > I also plan on making it known that users/developers should be able to > also contact any of the local moderation/operation staff for the medium > they're on, meaning they can contact any op in #gentoo or any moderator > in the forums. There's no need to necessarily go directly to the > proctors for everything. Cool. =8^) >> their council term, if elected). Was that really intended? Perhaps it > > Yes, it was intended. Nobody on the Council should be a proctor. I > think you missed that only the *initial* group of proctors includes all > global moderators. By the next council meeting, we plan on having a > much reduced list of proctors to serve in a more permanent role. OK. Makes sense now. I saw the /initial/ but wasn't sure where it was going from there. The further explanation makes sense. Thanks. =8^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 09:28 +, Duncan wrote: > If it's not correct, that they are staff and /not/ devs, therefore /not/ > eligible for council, then I've misunderstood. Apologies for the noise. Staff are "devs" and are eligible for the Council just as much as Infra are "staff" and eligible for the Council. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 04:35 +, Duncan wrote: > * "If you perceive a breach of the Code of Conduct guidelines, let the > proctors know." How? The council's email address is given for appeals, > but no general proctor address is listed. (At least none that I saw, even > after searching, so if it's there, it needs to be made rather more > prominent.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] a reasonable alias? Mentioning it right > after the above quoted sentence should work, I think. We had no such alias made, but I'm requesting it to be done. I'll update the document accordingly once we have the alias. I also plan on making it known that users/developers should be able to also contact any of the local moderation/operation staff for the medium they're on, meaning they can contact any op in #gentoo or any moderator in the forums. There's no need to necessarily go directly to the proctors for everything. > their council term, if elected). Was that really intended? Perhaps it Yes, it was intended. Nobody on the Council should be a proctor. I think you missed that only the *initial* group of proctors includes all global moderators. By the next council meeting, we plan on having a much reduced list of proctors to serve in a more permanent role. This will *include* moderators from the forums, but not all of them. If someone runs for Council and is elected, they would give up their position as proctor (but not as a moderator/operator). Since the next Council elections aren't before the next Council meeting, this should work out just fine. ;] Basically, the chain goes like this: local moderators/operators -> proctors -> Council -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:28:10AM +, Duncan wrote: > > I think you missed one thing. From the council page: "Only Gentoo > > developers may be nominated" Thus your corner-case of a moderator that > > does nothing else wanting to become a council member is not valid, > > because the moderator is not a developer, if he were, he would be doing > > other things as well. > It's possible I read the conclusions incorrectly, but I thought that > global forum moderators were made full Gentoo staff, and that, save for > the practical distinction of "tree dev" vs. not, the terms "Gentoo dev" > and "Gentoo staff" were interchangeable. That's at least part of what I > referred to with the mention of possible restriction I wasn't aware of, > as I wasn't positive about staff status, but if it's correct, then at > least in theory global mods could indeed run for council. > > If it's not correct, that they are staff and /not/ devs, therefore /not/ > eligible for council, then I've misunderstood. Apologies for the noise. Somebody else more intimately familiar with the meta-structure documents would be better suited to answer this one than me - reading those instead of the council page, I cannot tell one way or another if they are or are not able to run for the council (but it could also be that it's 02h40 and I'm really tired and still stuck on work stuff). -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Council Member E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpg4oXFkfa6Y.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:07:45 -0700: > I think you missed one thing. From the council page: "Only Gentoo > developers may be nominated" Thus your corner-case of a moderator that > does nothing else wanting to become a council member is not valid, > because the moderator is not a developer, if he were, he would be doing > other things as well. It's possible I read the conclusions incorrectly, but I thought that global forum moderators were made full Gentoo staff, and that, save for the practical distinction of "tree dev" vs. not, the terms "Gentoo dev" and "Gentoo staff" were interchangeable. That's at least part of what I referred to with the mention of possible restriction I wasn't aware of, as I wasn't positive about staff status, but if it's correct, then at least in theory global mods could indeed run for council. If it's not correct, that they are staff and /not/ devs, therefore /not/ eligible for council, then I've misunderstood. Apologies for the noise. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 04:35:00AM +, Duncan wrote: > * "If you perceive a breach of the Code of Conduct guidelines, let the > proctors know." How? The council's email address is given for appeals, > but no general proctor address is listed. (At least none that I saw, even > after searching, so if it's there, it needs to be made rather more > prominent.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] a reasonable alias? Mentioning it right > after the above quoted sentence should work, I think. There isn't one yet, but proctors@ or reporting on BugZilla will probably work fine as soon as kingtaco and kloeri actually get the initial proctors together. > * "To prevent conflicts of interest, Council members may not perform the > duties of a proctor." Great! There is however one potential problem, if > the summary post suggestion making current forum mods and etc proctors by > default becomes policy. I think you might have misread this, kloeri and kingtaco were going to look amongst the #gentoo ops, and the forums moderators for initial proctors, and seemant and g2boojum for the mailing lists. Who they are is not yet set at all, just that those are some of the initial candidates. > That is, global mods have status as Gentoo > staff, and if I'm not mistaken (it's possible there's a restriction I'm > not aware of), nothing until now has prevented them from running for > council if they decided to. The implication here is that mods, as > proctors, are forbidden from being council members (unless they give up > their mod status, but if that's their only or single major role in > Gentoo, that's asking them to do /nothing/ but be a council member during > their council term, if elected). Was that really intended? Perhaps it > was, but if not, maybe a clause enumerating that exception and specifying > that they simply abstain due to conflict of interest (possibly with a > designated participating in proctor decisions in their place, how is such > alternative chosen?) should be proposed for addition. I think you missed one thing. From the council page: "Only Gentoo developers may be nominated" Thus your corner-case of a moderator that does nothing else wanting to become a council member is not valid, because the moderator is not a developer, if he were, he would be doing other things as well. > * Building on the designated alternative idea, what about altering GLEP [snip complexity] > of interest. See the 20060914 council meeting where we discussed conflicts of interest and reached the conclusion that we should act professionally (and impartially) if possible, and abstain from a matter if that was not possible (example in the meeting was kloeri being the lead of devrel). -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Council Member E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpsSIrKvzylH.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Summary for 15 March 2007 special council meeting on CoC
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:02:15 -0700: > * The motion was called for accepted the CoC with the above > modifications, as well as revisiting it next council meeting, > and reviewing the actions of proctors during every council meeting. > - Passed 6 votes for yes, and 1 for abstain (vapier). > - The document was committed to the council project space temporarily, > until a better location is found for it: > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/coc.xml The first discussion draft was fine for what it was, but needed a lot of work. It's good to see that it got it, as the version linked above reflects that work. Thanks, all involved and specifically the council, Christel, and the editors/contributors/reviewers. Two things I don't see dealt with, a big one of immediate interest but should be trivial to correct, and a lessor issue, longer term, but will require some discussion to correct. Also a third more general item for discussion. * "If you perceive a breach of the Code of Conduct guidelines, let the proctors know." How? The council's email address is given for appeals, but no general proctor address is listed. (At least none that I saw, even after searching, so if it's there, it needs to be made rather more prominent.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] a reasonable alias? Mentioning it right after the above quoted sentence should work, I think. (For clarity, it's also worth considering putting both the proctor and the appeals/council address in a Contact Addresses section of it's own.) * "To prevent conflicts of interest, Council members may not perform the duties of a proctor." Great! There is however one potential problem, if the summary post suggestion making current forum mods and etc proctors by default becomes policy. That is, global mods have status as Gentoo staff, and if I'm not mistaken (it's possible there's a restriction I'm not aware of), nothing until now has prevented them from running for council if they decided to. The implication here is that mods, as proctors, are forbidden from being council members (unless they give up their mod status, but if that's their only or single major role in Gentoo, that's asking them to do /nothing/ but be a council member during their council term, if elected). Was that really intended? Perhaps it was, but if not, maybe a clause enumerating that exception and specifying that they simply abstain due to conflict of interest (possibly with a designated participating in proctor decisions in their place, how is such alternative chosen?) should be proposed for addition. * Building on the designated alternative idea, what about altering GLEP 39 (council) such that the next person down the list of candidates becomes the designated alternative voter, in case of councilor absence or conflict of interest, such as in the proctor case above? This could be done in a couple of ways. Either the last current councilor elected would become the alternative, and vote only in case of ties or as the alternative, or the next guy on the list could be taken, but without the tie breaking vote, only as an alternate. There's also the question of whether the alternate votes in any absence, or only if the absent councilor didn't designate a proxy. I'd say only if no proxy, except for conflict of interest cases, since the proxy then could be said to be tainted the same was, as he was chosen by the councilor with the conflict of interest. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
