I'd like to suggest that while anonymized external reporting is good, it is in the best interests of the community to be using a system that also:
1) needs to be logged into to view relevant content, with open public registration
2) Has a community-determined age limit for expiration of that content.
Without that, those types of systems can become:
re: Anonymized External Reporting, Closed Viewing, Open Public Registration
-) A vehicle for public humiliation (chronicling arguments from IRC on the web forever, sharing links during groupthink breakdowns et al)
-) or blacklisting ("ban this person, I found this fedora log")
re: content expiration:
-) Prevention of users from being able to outlive their mistakes. It is too easy for a dislocated entity to eventually become trigger happy with exiling problematic users, and I think this can detract from the purpose and nobility of the role these groups would serve.
I like the direction you guys are headed with this and support it fully, I'd just like to recommend these 2 aspects to avoid mistakes I've seen made in other places (and have even made myself at times).
We should bear in mind that while this has been a problem in Fedora for some time, not only is there all too often crossover between channels when the wrong people get into positions of authority, there can often be continued efforts towards an argument and it's not always the user. These will improve the welcoming environment Fedora is trying to foster.
IRC arguments can become quite heated and long lasting, and this will protect the users as well as the operators during diffusion.
Good luck, and good job if you can bring this split concept to Fedora IRC governship,