Proposal for ML conduct

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 15.05.2009 07:43, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 07:21 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> I completely agree that there is a problem but sorry, I strongly dislike
>> how the board acted/acts here.
>>
>> IMHO those that complained should have first made attemts to discuss a
>> proper solution on the effected lists (which didn't really happen
>> afaics) before going to the board for asking for help. Everything that
>> comes from the board like this feels like "some magic group at the top
>> of the hierarchy decided something without even bothering those that are
>> effected first". That is IMHO not how community project should act.
> This isn't the first time we've tried to fix things.

Haven't seen anything recently.

>  Previously we
> tried to employ a manner of policing ones self, by responding to the
> negative posts and pointing out in public that the actions were not
> appreciated.  It hasn't worked.

Then try again.

The whole situation feels like children fighting with each other and 
somebody running for his mummy for help.

But we are not children. And I for one don't want mummy to get involved, 
as that always makes the others feel unwell and in the end it afaics 
often creates new, bigger problems (which I'd say seems likely  here 
afaics).

>  It's not really the board's fault that
> people got tired of nothing happening on the lists and brought it to the
> project overseers.  We're trying to get something in place to correct
> the problem ASAP.

It's been a problem for years, so I can't see why we need ASAP suddenly.

>> IOW: yes, we need a board for the hard decisions, but it IMHO should
>> only get involved after other ways to solve the problem have failed.
>> Otherwise the contributors feel like small unwanted bees that are needed
>> to do the leg-work, but there opinion doesn't count.
>>
>>> The proposal:
>>>
>>> To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other
>>> Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists.
>>> The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other"
>>> policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the
>>> poster).  Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster
>>> with explanation as to why they were not allowed.  If after one day of
>>> moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the
>>> Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation,
>>> complete removal from the project, or other remedies.
>>>
>>>     Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity
>>>     directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other
>>>     things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful.
>>>
>>>
>>> * * *
>>
>> Counter proposal: Let the community regulate itself. Ran all the mails
>> through a procmail recipe or something like that adds to links at the
>> bottom of all mails like this:
>>
>> **
>> You mostly agree with the poster? Click here:
>> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/<msgid>&status=likedit
>>
>> You think the poster was not nice to others
>> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/<msgid>&status=notnicetoothers
>>
>> Check how others see this mail:
>> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/<msgid>&status=query
>> **
>>
>> Of course we need a small app on the server to count that.
>>
>> If someone then was "not nice to others" then at least some of the
>> people will click the link. The one that wrote the mail gets direct
>> feedback from those that read the mail and not from a magic board police
>> guard that should use his time for better things.
>>
>
> Are you willing to spend the time to create the app,

You know me for a while, you should know that I don't have the skills 
for that. ;-)

> and create it in such a way that it can't be 'gamed'
 > to silence somebody without proper reason?

No.

>  Would you have it done in the next week?

I don't see a need for next week.

 > [...]

CU
knurd