Mattia Rizzolo writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"):
> We have a very similar case within the MIA team (the willing contributor
> contacted us instead of the TC). The only difference is probably that
> the maintainer sent his NAK to me on IRC instead of in a email, and now
> he is not doing that either). The difference is that on paper we don't
> have the authority to "wrest the package away"; but I can't even mediate
> given that this person is not replying....
This makes me ask:
I envisioned a mediation stage, to try to reach consensus, before
deciding the conflict is irreducible and needs to be settled as such.
Could the MIA team do this ? Would you want to ? It seems like it
would need many of the same skills and there would be considerable
overlap with existing MIA activity.
It would be a role with little hard power but a lot of influence.
An aside about mediation:
Mediation and arbitration are very different things.
Mediation is about seeing if facilitated communication can help bridge
the gap, and bring people together. It can be very helpful. However,
mediation is normally not very "justice"-focused: it tries to avoid
saying who is right and wrong.
It is important not to allow mediation to become a barrier to
arbitration, or some other process which is actually prepared to make
judgements. Since without judgement (which is what we have now), the
powerless will always be oppressed by the powerful.
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.