On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, O'brien, Tim wrote: > Rules are rules. Maybe as a general rule, if a discussion doesn't need > secrecy, it should be help on community@, since community is now archived in > a public place. I believe this is called a "Sunshine policy"
Aye - that is a rule w're trying to introduce. Infrastructure@ is not secret; and we may well end up archiving it - but it is about unix sysadmin things; not about setting policy. > I understand your concerns. I raised these issues with infrastructure@ back > during the "Action not words" discussion. I'll try to echo it back, if I > have misunderstood, please correct me. As a user of ASF software, I rely on Thanks - that is valuable input; and this is the right place (or as good as we have such a place).. > ASF standards being set very high, I was playing devil's advocate with Mr. > Oliver when I raised these issues back in December. He was convincing at > the time, but, again, you've got some valid concerns. > >From what I gather, you are not necessarily opposed to Wiki as a general > "idea" - you just want to see it modified slightly to match the merit-based > and project-centric work of the foundation. In other words, giving a > non-committer the ability to use Wiki is not a problem as long as there is Not a problem ---> no I think it is -great- to have that ability! > some effective oversight by Wiki administrators. Let me summarize. > Issues: > > 1. Scope/Goals of the Wiki - fostering quality discussion > 2. Enforcement/Moderation of the Wiki > 3. Accountability Mechanism > > NOW concern about liability: > > 1. Does unmoderated public posting affect the corporate shield? Does the > ASF have any responsibility to limit access in order to protect the > foundation as a larger corporate entity? > > ---- reponses > > * To your NOW concern about liablility, that is a valid one. > > Most importantly, it might be a good idea to put a disclaimer into the > footer area of the Wiki sometime today. I believe that this would solve an > immediate need while other methods are investigated. I only assume that ASF > has some relationship with a lawyer, and it might make some sense to get a > lawyer to write a good disclaimer. > > I believe one of your previous messages on community@ had an interesting > idea: > http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msg > No=1166 ( only now, can you refer to past community messages, thank you > people! ). You mention that it would be better to require people to have > some sort of "identity". In other words, you want people to have some "skin > in the game". This seems reasonable, if you think that Wiki activity is a > clear and present danger which could expose the foundation to legal action, > then it is only sensible that this be fixed before any work goes forward. > > This is a *real* concern, ASF is a corporation of Delaware. I'M NOT A > LAWYER, but ASF corporate status is a huge part of why people can do what > they do here. ASF provides a corporate umbrella which limits liability - if > you provide assistance to ASF, you can't get sued, only the assets of the > Corporation are on the table. That's a good thing, if it is true that some > bozo could post illegal content and ruin the ASF, then you've got a point. > > On the other hand, because ASF hosts the Eyebrowse archive, any individual > may send an anonymous message to a mailing list license key and this message > is almost instantly published as a web page via Eyebrowse. From that > perspective, our email lists are simply another avenue for site content > creation. The only difference is that one must have a valid email address > in order to subscribe to a mailing list - this "gets to skin in the game". And - unlike a WiKi page; an email is 'pushed' to a very large community; and it is less likely that an issue is missed (or that anyone can easily 'deny' not having seen it) than it is with a WiKi page. > Again, get a lawyer to write a good disclaimer, and let's get some > regulations written up. > > * To your issues > > 1. Scope/Goals of the Wiki - fostering quality discussion > > Let's develop a formal proposal and codify this. Here's a start > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ApacheWikiScopeAndGoals - the > content about blogs and personal views may be a little controversial. I > think that personal views, criticism of the ASF, are best hosted on other > wikis. Those Wikis are in the works, and it is only rational that ASF have > no relationship to those Wikis. I am traveling right now; and have only email. I'll get back to this when I am on line again. > 2. Enforcement/Moderation of the Wiki > > There are 3 wiki admins right now. There are a larger number of people who > watch the recent changes list. I think that a formal proposal should > include a set of rules and regulations regarding moderation and enforcement. > It may also be wise to set up a PMC-lite for those people. > > 3. Accountability Mechanism > > I believe that this relates to your overriding NOW concern, and it would > help to have some sort of accountability mechanism that is anaolgous to the > mailing lists. I'm personally neutral on this issue, but if you believe > that it is a threat to the corporation, than this is a very big deal. I > think that a well written disclaimer coupled with a strong set of > enforcement and moderation rules could do the job effectively. Dw. > -------- > Tim O'Brien > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 4:41 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Wiki - we have a problem :) > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > I am seeing this weeking discussion reaching conclusions of > > sorts. However there is still a significant problem with oversight. > > > > What I mean here is -not- the ASF cultural thing of having > > things validated by your peers; but the oversight of the type > > that the ASF as a US incorperated is supposed to maintain. > > > > In this role's I am not as much concerned with pages going up > > which say 'Thou venomed swag-bellied skainsmate!' or other > > types of respect lacking community interaction; but > > specificaly of the type which gets us in > > real-live(tm) trouble; warez, child-porn, list of license keys, etc. > > > > So unless I hear this group establishing some very clear > > policy with respect to WiKi's I will propose to the board > > that they go and instruct the infrastructure@ folsk as follows: > > > > -> No Wiki(s) will be ran under ASF auspicien unless there > > > > -> is a PMC or similar body who duly provides oversight > > to any abuse. > > > > -> and the infrastructure@ pmc has validated that whatever > > access control, metrics and what not are appropriate and > > that each resource can clearly have an 'owner'. > > > > Note that I did not add things such as acceptable use > > policies or charters. I leave that to the PMC. > > > > Though I personally would certainly encourage PMC's wanting a > > PMC to think about that; as 'scope' helps to foster quality > > discussion. Though simply saying that use should be on topic > > or in line with the mission/goal (which usually is firmly > > embedded in the resolution which created the PMC in the first > > place) helps. > > > > Note that this is what is effectively happening on the push > > based mailing list; moderation, warning being send to > > pwersons going off topic and other non appropriate postings, > > and a community sense of 'scope'. > > > > I'd appreciate feedback to solve the 'NOW' problem (not > > getting sued by the scientology church or abetting (US) > > crime) - and to help me ask the board for the right thing. We > > can solve the 'real' issue later. > > > > Dw > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
