Looking for feedback on Fedora COC Enforcement Draft

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 03/02/2011 01:40 AM, Brian Pepple wrote:

<snip>

> == Try and resolve the problem yourself ==
>
> Attempt to resolve the issue at the lowest level first. If you are
> offended by someone's behavior, review the code of conduct and try and
> understand their point of view. Perhaps it's a misunderstanding or
> communication problem? Maybe a different understanding of the language
> or a difference in cultures? Perhaps it's a poor attempt at humor? If
> you have offended someone by your behavior, perhaps a apology would be
> in order (even if you are unsure what caused the issue).
>
> Some things to try/consider:
>
>        * If the involved parties won't listen to you, could you bring a
>          respected community member in to mediate?
>        * If the issue is heated, could waiting a few days and letting
>          tempers cool before revisiting the issue help?
>        * Is there a technical way for everyone's solutions to work ? Or
>          at least not interfere with each other?
>        * Can you redirect the people involved into a more appropriate
>          forum for the issue?
>
> == Forum / Channel / Mailing list moderators ==
>
> If issues persist and involved folks are unable to resolve them, the
> next step would be to ask a moderator of whatever resource the issue is
> occurring in to step in. IRC Channel operator, mailing list moderator,
> etc. Some of these forums may have their own way to deal with issues,
> follow their process. Let them know what the issue is and respectfully
> allow them to decide what to do.
>
> If you are a moderator try to resolve the issue in a way that all
> parties feel they were listened to and in a way that behavior that does
> not follow the code of conduct is eliminated.
>
> Some things to try/consider:
>
>        * Try a private message asking the involved parties to look at the
>          code of conduct/think more about their behavior.
>        * Follow any published processes your area may have. Note to
>          involved parties the specific things they are facing or have
>          broken.
>        * Can you post/note/speak out that the behavior is not acceptable
>          and redirect involved parties to other issues?
>        * Seek advice or thoughts from others that are uninvolved in the
>          conflict for ideas to redirect or resolve the issue.
>        * Avoid threatening involved parties. If you are going to act
>          (ban, moderate, remove) someone, do so in a fair and even handed
>          manner.
>
> If this is a mailing list, you can usually contact the owner(s) at:
> 'listname-owner at listaddress'
>
> If this is IRC, you can find a list of channel operators from chanserv:
> "/cs access #fedorawhatever list". (If this is one of #fedora or
> #fedora-social, you can get operator attention with the '@ops message'
> or by asking in #fedora-ops).
>
> If this is in person at an event, you can talk to the event organizers.
>
> Other areas may have their own contact process and procedures.

I would believe any kind of action on behalf of one or more parties 
involved is bad and will lead to further friction between all parties 
involved and what you are effectively doing with this proposal is only 
burdening the moderators.

Any dispute/differences needs to be handle from a neutral party thus I 
propose that what has been mentioned here will be made part of SOP for 
CWG to handle those difference should the unfortunate need for that arise.

The community needs to be ensured that CWG did what ever it could to 
settle a dispute before taking any necessary actions thus the CWG will 
need to handle all dispute brought to it's table in a completely open 
and in transparent manner for the community.

All communication between CWG and the parties involved be publicly 
available at the time of them transpiring and a public community 
announcement be made when an issue brought to it's table ( most likely 
in it's own track instance ) to alert the community about the problem ( 
the community could step in to try to help settle this before any kind 
of ruling on CWG behalf needs to take place which result only in two 
either it manages to settle the difference or it effectively casts out a 
community member ) .

By the creation of CWG it effectively became the judge jury and 
executioner of matters like these and given how it came to be I propose 
that the current *appointed* members will work on the underlying ground 
work for the CWG then the community nominates the persons they believe 
are capable of true neutrality and can detach themselves from any 
personal feeling/opinions and corporate ties and those persons contacted 
and ask if they would like to become members of the CWG followed by the 
community voting on the nominated members.

Note that *any* corporate members should be allowed express themselves 
freely within our community and under no circumstances should they get 
any *special* treatment or as was proposed on the meeting [1] that they 
be dealt with *internally* via their *manager*.

In the end I want to point everybody to and Shaun's excellent blog entry 
[2] over at Gnome and pay a good attention to his entry "A community is 
self-governing"

JBG

1. 
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-02-15/cwg.2011-02-15-18.08.log.html
2. http://blogs.gnome.org/shaunm/2011/02/22/is-your-community-a-community/