Looking for feedback on Fedora COC Enforcement Draft

[Max Spevack]

On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, seth vidal wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 20:40 -0500, Brian Pepple wrote:
>
>> == Community Working Group ==
>>
>> If involved parties feel the decision of the moderators/channel
>> operators were unfair or biased, they can raise the issue to the
>> Community working group. The CWG may appoint a mediator or decide
>> directly on the issue themselves.
>>
>> Some things to try/consider:
>>
>>       * If you bring an issue to the CWG, they may not decide the issue
>>         in your favor. Be understanding of any decisions made.
>>       * Handling of the issue could be reviewed and feedback for
>>         moderators/mailing lists managers provided. This may result in
>>         changes to policy, so be aware if you bring it up you may change
>>         things for the area you are working in.
>>       * Final decision takes place here.
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> _Final_ decision takes place at the CWG?
>
> How is the CWG appointed/elected? How long are they granted seats?

For the moment, it seems like it's one of those "serves at the pleasure 
of the FPL/Board" kind of things.

> If the CWG decides against someone are they, then, OUT of fedora? Is 
> it an excommunication? A Censure?

I'm assuimg that the "enforcement" draft *purposefully* stops short of 
talking about "removal from the community".  Which is probably a good 
idea if the attempt is to get general agreement on a nice starting point 
for both documents, which could later be built into something more, if 
the CWG chose to do so.

Or maybe I simply assume too much. :P

--Max