On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 02:47, Pete Forsyth <[email protected]> wrote:

> We would be better off if
> there were clearly articulated, published policies for OTRS

Indeed.

> I think Andy wants to hold somebody responsible for the
> absence of those things

You are mistaken; and I have complained previously in this thread and
in the on-wiki discussion about other people attempting to ascribe to
me motives or intentions that are not mine.

I am unsure why this happens, why people are so bad at it, or what
purpose it is supposed to achieve.

Please do not do so.

> But I would very much support an effort to draft, review, and publish
> policies and procedures going forward.

This is the wrong order; we /first/ need OTRS (or whoever oversees
OTRS, though five months after asking, we still don't know who that
is, if anyone) to publish its existing policies etc; then we can
review them; then we can, if necessary, draft and propose changes or
additions. And report any instances where OTRS agents are not acting
within them.

> For what it's worth, I was an OTRS agent for several years; but, precisely
> because of the absence of policies

This was presumably historical, because we have been told that there
are (now) polices, but they are (partly, perhaps mostly) on a
non-public wiki.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to