From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2657-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112C71381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:59:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D80D2E07F9;
Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:59:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-vb0-f46.google.com (mail-vb0-f46.google.com [209.85.212.46])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BA93E07D2
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:59:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 10so4011789vbe.33
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=akc67WcDzVHpzmDddbMSl8wzmoS3lET94ipYFrRGVJc=;
b=y8i8cGoKy3KzOpfeuqKKcrnC+Kh8ufqisGgFONdlUts+/jKGnVOWNi80hnV3cDMm9d
9lTZ0YSHOIpKIm1DXNsS81RYVow6BSG/o7+Y/ie4Hg7JQPfI35knCNyd+VxiAz/Q5Mb2
kWnLil82+ouqSbkeE09//aJN9WDJS5YNmw1R1An8V3dTTjcIcZEmAtg/HMyFFa4GHk7h
qBmeNu5ulg6iQw0Fh6E3nXBAG9MKaMWlAWJVU7qp55MTFkcSvPSZ58jDCxWl5JhRuOuO
kIT9+mcYnum0b99Se09hlxqeJhsZPi6LPa2QXYcmzypvCSWgnzKh5SGt6ZO1mtF1Czze
7LUw==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.215.200 with SMTP id ok8mr1327514vec.21.1371664743397;
Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.73.3 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C1EBF5.3080707@gentoo.org>
References: <51C1EBF5.3080707@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:59:03 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: qQ9DPQ6I99Fbn6VxWIiG25qJ4QQ
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=sXj+7JiZEAQVXwfVDgcSQ5kst1EaJYZhB9w5RcKAOqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Temporary DevRel actions for CoC violations
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 0e2f06dc-389c-4f00-b9d4-9182b0dfdb5f
X-Archives-Hash: 782d1370efde3f72d033d10639dddfdf
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> For me, this problem is critical. Devrel is working on formalizing a new
> policy, and we will announce news on this soon. In the meantime, to
> prevent further escalations, I will use my lead powers to request
> immediate bans whenever I see one of you violate the CoC[2] and ignore
> the previous warnings.
Perhaps a bit of a sledgehammer approach, but right now I think it is
safe to say that we're leaning far too on the side of leniency. I
look forward to the new policy proposals.
Oh, I do endorse the previous suggestion that we come up with another
way of appointing people to Devrel. My personal opinion is that it
should be appointed by Council (perhaps taking into account
recommendations from the Devrel team and others). Others have
suggested direct election. Either would give the team a bit more of a
mandate. That isn't really directed at the current team in particular
- it just seems like a better practice. Maybe an analogous situation
that works well is that the Trustees grant an annual budget to Infra
for routine maintenance. Anything reasonable charged against that
budget gets signed off by the Treasurer with no further discussion,
and any need outside the budget goes through the normal approval
process. Delegate and hands off...
Rich