Could even be that no-one has gotten around to writing any policies and guidance, and everyone is just winging it with very little oversight. How could we know? Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dennis During Sent: 20 July 2020 00:15 To: effeietsand...@gmail.com; Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system I think he's looking for openness. That doesn't require one to psychoanalyze him; just a straightforward reading of what he has said, especially in the context of wikidom. If there is some reason why OTRS isn't important enough to merit policies, supervision, and transparency, that should be easy to explain. If there is some other reason why we shouldn't trouble our little heads about it, it should be possible to try to explain that. On Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 18:01 effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:55 AM Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> > wrote: > > > On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 09:03, effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > You seem to be assuming - wrongly - that I have made assumptions which > > I have not made explicit. > > > > Ironically, you have not explicitly stated your assumption. > > > > > My reading of this discussion is that there is a lot of 'secrecy' > assumed > > > > No secrecy is being assumed. Too much secrecy is being observed. > > > > > 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. > > > > It may well be that some policies that should exist, do not, or are > > ''de facto'' without being written down. But until we see a > > comprehensive list of those that do exist and are written, how can we > > know? > > > > > I feel comfortable sharing that the set of OTRS-wide 'policies' that is > > on > > > the wiki, is probably of little interest to this matter. > > > > I am very interested in seeing all those 'policies'; as others have > > said they are. > > > > As noted earlier in this thread, I do not see how I could be any more > > clear about my wish to see them. > > > > > This is why I > > > noted that Jonatan's response could be misleading, because it implies > all > > > kind of secrecy that doesn't exist. > > > > It stated, not implied, that "the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS > > agents sign" prevented him from answering some of the questions asked > > on-wiki in February, and quoted at the start of this thread. > > > > > There are actually a few policies > > > linked at [[m:OTRS <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS>]], that are > > > simply copied there (Access, Activity policies). > > > > That page, and those linked from it, do not answer the questions to > > which I have already referred. > > > > > There is some stuff about > > > privacy, confidentiality and how to deal with mailing lists. Imho > nothing > > > that exciting. > > > > Perhaps not exciting to you; but I and others argue that such content > > should nonetheless be public. We have been told that OTRS agents are > > discussing the matter on their private email and IRC channels, but > > then... Nothing. > > > > > OTRS is an immensely diverse system, and I don't think it's helpful to > > try > > > to analyze that with overly broad questions. > > > > I do not accept that questions such as, for example: > > > > 5 how is OTRS overseen, and who by? > > > > 7 what is the process for the community to remove an > > individual's OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold > > or abide by policy? > > > > 9 which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent, > > or remove their permissions? > > > > 10 how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen? > > > > are "overly broad"; but if you think they are, how would you narrow their > > focus? > > > > > First of all: you're framing my words and taking them out of context. I'm > not going to waste further energy on that. > > Answering that would require me to actually understand what the underlying > issue is that you want to solve. I've given up on that. > > Lodewijk > > > > -- > > 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> _______________________________________________ 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>
