On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 21:01 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <eba...@gmail.com> > wrote: > There is no official enforcement of these principles > > unless the CoC gets an official enforcement (and this > paragraph is > removed) any requirement on having members sign the CoC page > is a > pointless exercise. > > > What kind of enforcement would you like to see? A public shaming? > Temporarily suspension of Planet privileges? Would the membership > committee be a good place to do this?
I'm not interested in public shaming; what I'm interested in is that there is a well-defined, possibly quick way for foundation members (and non-members as well) to report and have addressed CoC violations. currently it's all over the place: bugzilla is policed by the bug masters, the planet is policed by its editors, the mailing lists are policed by the lists maintainers, IRC is policed by the people in #opers. I might happen to know this but it's not explicitly defined anywhere; and even if it were, the sentence up there makes reporting seem a moot point. if we want to have the CoC as a binding contract for foundation members then yes: I agree that the membership committee should be the official contact for requests of enforcement. ciao, Emmanuele. _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
