diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'decisions/documents.tex')
1 files changed, 92 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/decisions/documents.tex b/decisions/documents.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dc4d744
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/documents.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+\chapter{Code of Conduct}
+\section{``CoC enforcement proposal'', by Donnie Berkholz, Nov. 2007}
+Source: \agoref{gentoo-council}{cbfe572adb090dfba1cc004b1cca6979}
+\index{Code of Conduct!enforcement}\index{project!proctors}
+Consider this entire document a draft open to council discussion. I
+appreciate the people on the gentoo-project list who contributed to the
+\paragraph{The problem}
+My basic philosophy is: compliment in public, criticize in private. One
+of the problems with the proctors last time around was that their
+actions became too public, embarrassing the parties involved. Another
+problem with the proctors was that real action was not taken soon
+enough, and too long was spent talking. Real action in this context
+means that someone is temporarily blocked from posting to the relevant
+forum (mailing lists, IRC, forums), rather than sitting around talking.
+A third problem with the proctors was the difference in interpretation
+of the CoC within the group and with the council. It's particularly
+important to discriminate technical discussions from personal attacks
+and misconduct.
+\paragraph{The conceptual solution}
+A primary focus of CoC enforcement is deterrence from continued
+violation, so permanent action is unnecessary. Thus, what seems
+necessary is a way to take rapid, private, temporary action.
+By making initial actions temporary (e.g., 6-12 hours in most cases),
+they can be taken rapidly with little negative consequence in the case
+of a mistake. The goal is to provide developers with a cooling-off
+period but allow them to rejoin the discussion with little loss. Since
+the actions are always private, the only reason other developers will
+learn about them is that either the affected developer or whoever took
+the action (the actor) leaked it. Leaks by the actor will be taken
+seriously as a CoC violation in their own right.
+The basic idea behind the time frame is that the longer the action, the
+fewer people who can choose to take it. Perhaps only one or two people
+besides the council could decide to take any action longer than 12
+hours, which would severely impede a developer's ability to participate
+in a discussion.
+Whoever's taking action also needs to have a similar interpretation of
+the CoC as the council, which is the problem that came up with the
+proctors. To ensure this, the council will need some kind of role in
+deciding who could take action. But we don't want to fall into the trap
+of writing down every little rule and every possible infraction; that
+just makes it easy to find loopholes.
+\paragraph{The implementation}
+One way to enable Gentoo to enforce the CoC with these ideas in mind is
+to create a highly selective team with only short-term abilities and a
+strong lead to ensure the team's actions fit the council's CoC
+interpretation. Adhering to the principles mentioned above is what
+discriminates between this group and the former proctors.
+All this team's actions must be approved by the lead within a short time
+period or must be reverted. It's expected that many actions will range
+from 6-12 hours, so 12 hours seems like a reasonable time to require
+lead approval. Whenever the lead is unavailable, approval falls to the
+council. (Remember, two council members together can make decisions.)
+The lead of this team must gain council approval for any action lasting
+3 or more days. To ensure that this process remains temporary, in no
+case can any action last longer than 7 days. These actions must also be
+forwarded on to devrel or userrel, depending on who's involved, and they
+will consider longer-term suspension or termination.
+There is no conflict of interest between the council and this team's
+members, because the council is considered to have the best interests of
+Gentoo in mind. Developers can be members of both groups. The council
+must approve all members of this team, and it must reassess them
+annually to ensure they still interpret the CoC in the same way.
+Furthermore, the team's lead will be appointed by the council to further
+ensure a cohesive CoC interpretation.
+It is expected that membership on this team will be highly selective and
+not all who wish to join will make the cut. The team will be limited to
+3 people for a probationary period so we don't get dumped in the deep
+end right away, and it will never have more than 5 people. Once
+appointed by the council, the team lead will choose applicants for the
+rest of the team to forward on for council approval. \ No newline at end of file