#71: IRC SIG reform
---------------------+---------------------
Reporter: be0 | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+---------------------
Comment (by langdon):
Just a comment as I was at least one of the people suggesting "reporting"
in the council meeting. And, to clarify, what I meant was non-anonymized
reporting of the person *doing* the banning not the banned. Basically to
have visibility in to the enforcement of policy, with visibility attached,
because there seems to be a breakdown in "over-enforcement" which is what
lead to some of this discussion.
re: Kevin's comments
I would say that the ops have perms/policy/whatnot to be the fall back
moderator if there is no one in channel from the outreach orgs. Basically,
what I really want here is, most of the time, is a two-phase commit on
enforcement actions and people who have actively chosen to do outreach to
do the first wave of discussion. However, the outreach people are not ops
people and we don't have to make the rules draconian as long as it works
most of the time.
i agree with you on elections
definite +1 on the "pull irc sig/tickets in to commops meetings"
+1 on "more friendly people might just solve this"
re: Phanes comments
I agree with your two comments. And, I think that means you don't have to
mention the part where you made the mistake anymore as a result ;)
--
Ticket URL: <
https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/71#comment:12>
council <
https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets