FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-10-2011, 10:00 PM
Jeff Spaleta
 
Default Discussion regarding Community Working Group and/or Ombudsman

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think a body of Ombudsees, appointed by the FPL, confirmed by the
> Board, serving 1-2 year terms. The reasons being the following:
>
> 1) Multiple people are going to be needed because unless RH is paying
> for it, these people will be volunteering to deal with grumpy
> situations.
> 2) Elections do not make sense to me in this case. The person is a
> facilitator which is a set of skills not everyone has nor one that
> people are going to be able to see to elect if X is better than Y.

Here's a better question, do we really expect to be able to find
volunteers with the necessary skills? These people will be our very
own volunteer fire fighters in a sense. Doing a community service on a
volunteer basis fighting the fires the rest of set in our efforts to
tear down other people's bikesheds obstructing the view atop our own.

Real-world volunteer fire fighters get some amount of training and are
not expected to walk in the door with all the skills necessary to
fight fires. I'm not saying these people will need financial
compensation. But I am saying that maybe some skills development is a
worthwhile investment, especially if we don't want to see a high rate
of turn-over or burn out. Though I would not know how to go about
making that skills development actually happen.

-jef
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 05-10-2011, 10:33 PM
inode0
 
Default Discussion regarding Community Working Group and/or Ombudsman

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Jared K. Smith
<jsmith@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Now that the Fedora Board has formally accepted the documents prepared
> by the Community Working Group regarding a code of conduct and the
> enforcement of the code of conduct, I'd like to start a discussion
> regarding the longer-term role of the Community Working Group. *While
> the enforcement of the code of conduct (particularly in serious
> circumstances) should take place at the Board level, I think there's
> general agreement that it might be helpful to have a person or group
> dedicated to helping mediate conflicts and referring cases to the
> Fedora Board as necessary. *That group could be the CWG, an elected
> ombudsman, or something else.
>
> What would you like to see?

I don't really think without a more clearly defined set of
responsibilities for such a group there can be much sensible
discussion of its composition. You mention a mediation role but I
could imagine the CWG taking on a broader function than just dispute
mediation. One of keeping an eye on the overall health of the
community and one of intervening in problem pockets before there is a
big fuss that escalates out of control. One of taking action to help
foster healthy communities as opposed to one of reacting to problems
after the fact. Something to think about in addition to dispute
mediation maybe?

John
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:43 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org