I think if anything disputes should be handled by a panel of ports with in the group either champions board members or a new group created for such events if we feel that right now none of these groups are properly trained to handle it then I think we should look out side of the space for people to train said members . On Feb 19, 2014 10:43 PM, "Michael Griesacker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone else have a concern about this? > "CWG has the authority to modify their protocol with > approval of the Membership." -I have an issue with this, since having > authority overrides needing approval. If they need approval, they don't > have authority. I'll assume they don't have authority, and the wording just > needs cleaned up. > > "...the CWG would be using to set a precident that defines "approval of the > membership".". - the CWD should not be setting precedence or definitions > of membership approval. Do we not have a defined process of membership > approval already? > > Regards, > > Mike > On Feb 19, 2014 7:48 PM, "Andrew Buczko" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Can you explain that in english? >> Are we going to farm-out our disputes to a desktop environment? >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Torrie Fischer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I'd like to suggest a modification to our bylaws via amendment. >>> >>> The Problem: Nobody is actually trained to handle interpersonal disputes >>> and >>> the resolution therof >>> >>> The Solution: A Community Working Group that acts as the central point of >>> contact for questions about communication between community participants >>> along >>> with a respected independent mediator between community participants. >>> >>> This is an idea that is currently being worked on at Norton's Imperial >>> Labs, >>> with lots patterns taken from KDE: >>> >>> http://ev.kde.org/workinggroups/cwg.php >>> >>> I would like to see this implemented as: >>> >>> * A brief amendment to our bylaws that defines the offices required and >>> delegates the power of conflict resolution and community management to >>> them, >>> with a statement that the CWG has the authority to modify their protocol >>> with >>> approval of the Membership. >>> * A protocol established by the membership in the traditional proposal >>> process >>> that the CWG would be using to set a precident that defines "approval of >>> the >>> membership". >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
