Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Re: [board-discuss] MCC questions ..


On 2020-09-05 18:53, Dennis Roczek wrote:
Hi Michael,

I missed something. ;-)

Am 05.09.2020 um 18:07 schrieb Dennis Roczek:
* To what degree should the MC's decisions & discussion
  be transparent (ie. publicly available) ?
Most internal discussions are about improving the tools or about
concrete applications. The discussion about applications should NOT be
public. Discussions about how the tools should or could be improved
(e.g. dashboard) can be opened without any problems.

I missed to add a reason why the discussion about the application should
not be published: see our disaster with the mascot: if we make
everything in public the members of the MC might get spammed, pushed,
and bullied.


The mascot incident is a great example of why public involvement matters! The lessons learned should not be "make everything more closed-door" but "What can we learn from disappointing our users/community?" Users were angry and hurt for a reason and brought very valid concerns to a very flawed event.

(Bullying is *not* acceptable and I vehemently denounce any acts of harassment from the controversy).


Even more fatal: some groups might get pushy to get their folks into the group. Moreover the GDPR 
sometimes prohibits every discussion public: as already said we do have corner cases with heath 
issues, corona-problems, being too young and other cases which do not should be public!


I have anecdata: A high-profile "rockstar" developer applied to be an Arch Linux TU last year [1] and we received colorful remarks from the peanut gallery. Contention and disappointment was voiced with our questions and handling, and the applicant ultimately withdrew but the discourse was not toxic. In fact, I'd say that the comments from the general public provoke reflection - even if I do not agree with them.

I lean toward making applications public (GDPR concerns put aside). From a pragmatic perspective, private list mails can easily be leaked the moment contention bubbles up. My Debian outsider perspective sees private lists as good for promoting their issue with political drama and causes sites like [2] to sprout up. I'm not qualified for much more than speculation; I'd love to hear the opinions of the more experienced. I'd be curious to know how other communities like Debian or Fedora manage applications and whether public/private have been helpful.

[1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2019-February/034918.html
[2] https://debian.community/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.