From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AE631382C5 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:51:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4FCEE0C2F; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ua0-x22b.google.com (mail-ua0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A51AE0C08 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id q8so10924340uae.4 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:51:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=scriptkitty-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=A5LMonci0H4BwG1ymg7Ckd0hNKyormhOh1mp0qmDiOM=; b=Yg2vlmRiJaZAEImgxte3xgA9/S7wOjSUyHE6/beBiop9hi3A/GIlrRWX02GzsyVmCB GHEhze/7Du4AU+GOtccQS0am+I6OARt3jIUbev6dlK8EM+MxzI1TC/1S1u6uViAZcO+1 pTWc5BXLT+fY5UgtLcH8L617EzRHldEScQdc3riJ8FpDzmj6bfPxRxhCGtdM2WeCUDj7 Isu0s/SM9XEFPdHLmC6cTDnne0VPRh+5KQeySkUc9DenxBSgFm9RHTSqWTUoxBT1UC1V yRnQCUz0y2DEGnPka3j7U4UBFzAY5Q84q9HfCiGz6LGPmCJsZY3/Xzw6eTL7R9E4kVXk YbIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=A5LMonci0H4BwG1ymg7Ckd0hNKyormhOh1mp0qmDiOM=; b=lJD9/uIG9P2gioNVAbJmzu77HQyt6D+/xcdJRuDNzaPTIVuqZizxax9p+nXBH4B9sn zB5D9xvg5uw5SV5jI/KHNZxf4EtIXWpipjCOXD7mIYed+8SREyZ6bdeulk9t4sIVSGjL toub8V0/yUZQ2Z485bI4FCZe0CrknlvGz8zco/8WTv0Ivp+BpftKPxIH9bPskl8gxpNY GfTJw87VNQsAapRSYae9U08K1qcGrQQPCbl+pV6LVCm3bJl/1LxD9TAjqZg6dRiJyd3g EfApu1CISqEkbz7U0XuCsJWXCUS7JiwcP3k/HPTaDtOiS0thD89QfvlIQbDBvGnPZUDd TK+A== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPAMf62KwipalO9zlKB0qjGFv2So+8IJfNc8t5B6tdMyFDLFjCAj pknqEyZ4TPkATI6W7NkeNzIzIDnKg9yKdeTr1A00RF1R X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226fWFhSjD764B9BDjhAHw27BWfxwSyv1yQ0qPSMPc/S58A0nTSNF+9pl1cnbmbrrM2pilxuiRtLd0mz+1sTX/8= X-Received: by 10.176.97.207 with SMTP id m15mr65380uan.136.1518501105577; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:51:45 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.176.37.10 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:51:45 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [98.116.189.160] In-Reply-To: References: <20180211224234.GB6747@linux1.home> <20180212165506.GA23201@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <1f63e6de-999d-e0cd-990b-8813293357d6@gentoo.org> From: Alec Warner Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:51:45 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3W-LhPfnWFwr1-eZCcpVpoEfuCY Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals To: gentoo-project Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1ea5b4fd48250565119645" X-Archives-Salt: c116033b-f7ad-44de-8520-4259a11fae83 X-Archives-Hash: 0b2d79a26f9dc283102801ae908cba63 --94eb2c1ea5b4fd48250565119645 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:02 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 13/02/18 04:58, Dean Stephens wrote: > > On 02/12/18 11:55, William Hubbs wrote: > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 08:53:24AM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: > >>> How about if they just abstain from any votes where there may be a > conflict > >>> of interest? I would hate to limit the ability of people to contribute > >>> technically just because they were elected to council. > >> The confusing thing about this is, how would we define "conflict of > >> interest"? > >> > >> Suppose that the council decides to accept an appeal from comrel. Is it > >> a conflict of interest for a member of the council who is also a member > >> of comrel to vote in the appeal? If it isn't, it is at least a pretty > >> strong perception that it is. > >> > > Why? How? Exactly what sort of conflicting interest is supposed to be > > present? > > > There seems to be two divergent schools of thinking here: > 1) Those that think that there is, or could be, (potential for) a > conflict of interest, > and 2) Those that cannot conceive there even could be a conflict of > interest. > I'm not aware of anyone advocating for case two (not even Rich! :)) > > I think it would be useful for both sides to state their cases, and > perhaps this particular issue could have its bike-shed painted once, and > for good..... > > Ultimately this comes down to a discussion about whether potential conflicts are allowed or not. In some fields (law, or finance for example) there are rules against having even potential conflicts. Should Gentoo emulate those rules and produce an organization that avoids even the appearance of conflict? In other fields, potential conflicts are allowed. There tend to be policies about disclosing conflicts (disclosure is typically encouraged here.) Organizations can use the disclosures to put in appropriate controls. To use an example: A council member is on a team (not even necessarily QA / Comrel). That team's lead makes a decision. The council member doesn't agree with the decision and appeals to council. I would argue the member raising the issue has a conflict and they should not vote (recuse / abstain). If you believe the above premise, even if we take William's patch, its clear we cannot eliminate conflicts of interest among Gentoo Leadership (e.g. the above example is a conflict; but it isn't resolved by William's patch.) I'm also not clear on the problem statement. William's opener was: "I have felt this way for a long time, because I think it compromises the full council's ability to vote fairly on appeals." So it seems that the problem statement is about appeals being fair (or appearing fair, or feeling fair?) Maybe we could discuss Appeals specifically; and how they appear or make people feel. I'm not sure I have a better idea of 'fairness' than just soliciting feedback. -A --94eb2c1ea5b4fd48250565119645 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:02 AM, M. J. Everitt <<= a href=3D"mailto:m.j.everitt@iee.org" target=3D"_blank">m.j.everitt@iee.org= > wrote:
O= n 13/02/18 04:58, Dean Stephens wrote:
> On 02/12/18 11:55, William Hubbs wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 08:53:24AM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: >>> How about if they just abstain from any votes where there may = be a conflict
>>> of interest? I would hate to limit the ability of people to co= ntribute
>>> technically just because they were elected to council.
>> The confusing thing about this is, how would we define "confl= ict of
>> interest"?
>>
>> Suppose that the council decides to accept an appeal from comrel. = Is it
>> a conflict of interest for a member of the council who is also a m= ember
>> of comrel to vote in the appeal? If it isn't, it is at least a= pretty
>> strong perception that it is.
>>
> Why? How? Exactly what sort of conflicting interest is supposed to be<= br> > present?
>
There seems to be two divergent schools of thinking here:
1) Those that think that there is, or could be, (potential for) a
conflict of interest,
and 2) Those that cannot conceive there even could be a conflict of
interest.

I'm not aware of anyone a= dvocating for case two (not even Rich! :))
=C2=A0

I think it would be useful for both sides to state their cases, and
perhaps this particular issue could have its bike-shed painted once, and for good.....


Ultimately this com= es down to a discussion about whether potential conflicts are allowed or no= t.

In = some fields (law, or finance for example) there are rules against having ev= en potential conflicts. Should Gentoo emulate those rules and produce an or= ganization that avoids even the appearance of conflict? In other fields, po= tential conflicts are allowed. There tend to be policies about disclosing c= onflicts (disclosure is typically encouraged here.) Organizations can use t= he disclosures to put in appropriate controls. To use an example:

A council membe= r is on a team (not even necessarily QA / Comrel). That team's lead mak= es a decision. The council member doesn't agree with the decision and a= ppeals to council.
I would argue the member= raising the issue has a conflict and they should not vote (recuse / abstai= n).

If= you believe the above premise, even if we take William's patch, its cl= ear we cannot eliminate conflicts of interest among Gentoo Leadership (e.g.= the above example is a conflict; but it isn't resolved by William'= s patch.)

I'm also not clear on the problem statement. William's opener w= as: "I have felt=C2=A0this way for a long time, because I think it compromises the f= ull=C2=A0council's ability to vote fa= irly on appeals." So it seems that the problem statement is about appe= als being fair (or appearing fair, or feeling fair?) Maybe we could discuss= Appeals specifically; and how they appear or make people feel. I'm not= sure I have a better idea of 'fairness' than just soliciting feedb= ack.

=
-A
--94eb2c1ea5b4fd48250565119645--