We're dealing with a diverse community here, and at the same time people often want to imply information without making it explicit. I rather have that people make their assumptions explicit so that you have an opportunity to clarify, and use that as the basis for further conversation.
My reading of this discussion is that there is a lot of 'secrecy' assumed, where it is probably more a lack of existence of policies in the way Andy would like them to exist. This is a known problem with OTRS. I feel comfortable sharing that the set of OTRS-wide 'policies' that is on the wiki, is probably of little interest to this matter. This is why I noted that Jonatan's response could be misleading, because it implies all kind of secrecy that doesn't exist. There are actually a few policies linked at [[m:OTRS <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS>]], that are simply copied there (Access, Activity policies). There is some stuff about privacy, confidentiality and how to deal with mailing lists. Imho nothing that exciting. There is plenty of other 'stuff' on that wiki - which may or may not have to be confidential. I wouldn't be against someone combing through that and looking what can be published - at their own peril. The point is, nobody seems willing or able to do that. These pages have accumulated over the years, and it's simply not going to help anyone to triplicate that effort. I'm not fundamentally against it, I just don't think it's a good use of time and energy. I for sure ain't gonna do that, even if you paid me for it. OTRS is an immensely diverse system, and I don't think it's helpful to try to analyze that with overly broad questions. I suspect you could spend a few years worth of research on understanding it. That is why I tried to get at the bottom of what Andy actually wants, so that I can try to help with that. Given that Andy seems unwilling to make the questions narrower (my interpretation) - that ends this conversation on my side, as I have little more to contribute. Lodewijk On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 9:25 AM Peter Southwood < peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > Seems to me that if someone does not specify a motivation, we leave it as > that - no motivation. It you want to know what it is, you ask. You may get > an answer, but sometimes it is not particularly relevant, as the question > may be worth asking for whatever reason because the answer could be useful > anyway. > This strikes me as one of those questions. I would be interested to know > the answers, because they would be illuminating and useful. It does not > really matter to me what Andy was thinking about at the time other than > wanting an answer to a reasonable, neutrally expressed question about > something I considered should be freely available somewhere in the system. > What was surprising is how long it has taken to get what little information > has been forthcoming, but that has little bearing on why the question was > asked in the first place. > Cheers, > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On > Behalf Of Pete Forsyth > Sent: 17 July 2020 23:17 > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system > > Andy, I agree with you on the substance -- that we should get to a place > where there are clearly articulated policies, with widespread buy-in, that > are reliably adhered to. > > It's the interpersonal stuff that I feel is distracting in a public > discussion. If you feel it's worthwhile to talk that stuff through, I'd be > happy to do so offlist. But I won't discuss it further on this list, which > amounts to asking our colleagues in the Wikimedia world to endure something > they don't need to. I've already told you I regret my mistaken remark about > your intentions, so if you like, we could leave it at that. > > Anyway, for the list -- what would you propose as a next step that you or I > could take, without relying on anybody else in the short term? Can you > think of anything? Or does that strike you as completely impossible? I am > rather skeptical that this particular 20-post thread has moved any hearts > or minds (but perhaps you have reason to disagree with that - ?) > > -Pete > -- > [[User:Peteforsyth]] > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:41 PM Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> > wrote: > > > On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 17:19, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Since it seems > > > that multiple people are misunderstanding you on this point, I wonder > > > whether there's anything you could do to express your views on this > point > > > more clearly. > > > > Here is the entire post I made to Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard on 27 > February: > > > > #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~# > > > > We need answers to the following questions (some asked, but not > > answered, above, some arising from that discussion): > > > > 1. what are OTRS' rules and policies? > > 2. where are those rules and policies documented, and why are they not > > public? > > 3. where are those rules and polices discussed and decided? > > 4. what is the process for getting those rules and policies changed > > (or reworded for clarity)? > > 5. how is OTRS overseen, and who by? > > 6. what is the approval process for an individual to become an OTRS > agent? > > 7. what is the process for the community to remove an individual's > > OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold or abide by policy? > > 8. if an individual has been acting contrary to policy, what is the > > process for reviewing and if necessary overturning their past actions > > (including contacting and apologising to their correspondents)? > > 9. which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent, or remove their > > permissions? > > 10. how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen? > > > > Clearly, the equivalent for these exists on Commons, and our sister > > projects. OTRS agents can not expect to act without equivalent levels > > of transparency and accountability, even if individual transactions > > are confidential. > > > > #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~# > > > > Please tell me which parts of it could be more clear, and how. > > > > You certainly did not seem to be concerned about a lack of clarity in > > it, when you replied: > > > > Excellent list, Andy. I concur... I think it would be very much in > > the interests of OTRS > > agents and the Wikimedia movement overall to address this list of > > questions in a > > forthright way, and make some adjustments (such as publishing > > policies and a process > > for amending policies) > > > > shortly after I posted it. > > > > Or did you have some other unclear post in mind? > > > > -- > > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
