Hey all,

There actually already is a moderation suggestion for the case of off-topic
messages here
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EDI/Draft+moderation+guidelines

"The comment would be more appropriate on the list <list>.  Please send it
there instead."

But I feel like it may not fully cover this concern.  Craig or Shane, Do
you have a suggestion for how to describe the case you are referring to,
and how to respond to it in the form of a concrete moderator guideline?

Thanks,
Myrle

On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 11:49 PM Shane Curcuru <[email protected]> wrote:

> Craig Russell wrote on 2019-7-20 4:47PM EDT:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think that one of the guidelines for moderation of a working list (as
> opposed to a general list) should be:
> >
> > Does this message help serve the function of the group it is directed to?
> >
> > There is a lot of discussion around whether a post is offensive, ad
> hominem, triggering, etc. and these clearly should be rejected either via
> social or technical means.
> >
> > But do we have consensus that for a working group (like this one at D&I)
> we should insist that messages have to be helpful to the group in
> fulfilling its mission?
>
> +1 to all above.  Yes, some of the calls here may be perceived as
> subjective; as long as the moderators are also active participants in
> the work and are on the relevant committee/PMC, then we should trust
> them in general to make the right call.
>
> For random email senders, this makes sense: we're happy for each project
> (or committee) to set some of their own guidelines in a broad sense for
> how they work together.
>
> For ASF Members, while there is a long established de facto ability to
> have read access to mailing lists, that does not translate to any
> particular merit in terms of committing or working in any particular PMC
> or committee.  So if a specific PMC or committee discusses and works on
> documented moderation guidelines, I believe they should be able to apply
> them to Members and non-Members alike.
>
> In terms of escalations (i.e. when a poster disagrees with the
> moderation itself, and to ensure the board or relevant officer are aware
> of possibly problematic moderation rejections) we alredy have a policy:
>
>   https://www.apache.org/board/escalation
>
> > Sorry if this isn't totally relevant.
>
> No, perfect timing and well framed.
>
> --
>
> - Shane
>   Director & Member
>   The Apache Software Foundation
>

Reply via email to