[kde-community] Proposals for dealing with bad behavior

[Jos Poortvliet]

On Thursday 08 August 2013 12:48:48 Thomas Zander wrote:
> I have no idea how I ended up on the mailinglist,
If you've read the e.V. list you'd know that there was a vote at Akademy to 
subscribe all e.V. list members to the community mailing list to facilitate 
moving our discussions there.

> but since I am I'll just
> comment in private. The document looks to strike the tone that IMO makes
> sense. The wording in some paragraphs may need clarification, but nothing
> major. (well, the last part mentioning we have 4 principles may qualify).

Thanks!

> I think if this was in place during my koffice times, I expect it would not
> have gotten to a split like it did. Some not-aceptable behaviour generated
> talks with people (not me ;)  that were marked as "horrible" by cwg
> members, as such giving them some 'teeth' would be great.  Accountability
> is required, as you know, but accountability without repurcussions is
> useless.

Yeap. And yes, I think it would've been helpful 'back in the day'. It's 
unfortunate it took us so long (and it still wouldn't have happened if I had 
not initiated it, very much based on my experiences in openSUSE).

> I'm gonna figure out how to unsubscribe from the list now. Have a nice day!
> :)
Same to you. But do note that the e.V. list should become a lot more quiet now 
we can discuss much if not most in public. Votes will still be brought to that 
list but the discussion will happen in public.

Cheers,
J

> Quoting Jos Poortvliet <jospoortvliet at gmail.com>:
> > On Friday 02 August 2013 14:44:52 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >> 
> >> At Akademy, Valery, Peter and myself organized a BoF session about
> >> conflict
> >> handling. Valery wanted to discuss the situation around mailing list- and
> >> IRC moderation; I had a proposal for those few cases (just a handful in
> >> the
> >> history of our community) when things really go out of hand.
> >> 
> >> I've updated the wiki page with the notes. You can find there two
> >> proposals:
> >> 
> >> One to essentially set up a communication channel for the IRC, Forum and
> >> Mailing List moderators; and urge them to come up with some kind of
> >> process
> >> and/or documentation for dealing with unpleasant behavior.
> >> 
> >> The second, the 'stormy day' scenario, is a proposal from myself to allow
> >> the CWG to deny people who are unwilling to adapt their behavior to our
> >> community access to our infrastructure; initially for a two-week
> >> cool-down
> >> period but at some point for much longer periods.
> >> 
> >> http://community.kde.org/Akademy/2013/ConflictResolution
> >> 
> >> We would appreciate your feedback. The first step (the communication
> >> channel for moderators) is already in the process of being executed; the
> >> second proposal will need to be discussed and vote don by the e.V.
> >> membership. However, I'd like to invite everybody, members and
> >> non-members alike, to comment upon it.
> >> 
> >> Oh and from the others who were present at the BoF, besides a thank you,
> >> a
> >> request: please check if it is complete and accurate! I might have missed
> >> things.
> >> 
> >> Greetings and hugs,
> >> Jos Poortvliet
> > 
> > I have seen very few comments on this. Does that mean everybody agrees, it
> > is perfect and I can put this up for a vote, which will get 100%
> > approval? It is a bit surprising that we got it right after just one
> > round of discussion at Akademy, I think we should create proposals there
> > more often ;-)
> > 
> > Greetings,
> > J
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20130808/ea86a961/attachment.sig>