On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Daniel Campbell <z...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > Well, let's consider the order of events here: > ... > This looks awfully clear to me. >... > I'm not focused on the ban, or whether it was deserved.
That's exactly what you've done here. You've connected a bunch of dots that you can see, and don't consider that there may be dots that you don't see. >> >> And the only item recently submitted that is relevant is the item for >> the splitting of the mailing list, and the Council hasn't even met to >> make any decisions one way or another. You're exasperated over >> something the Council hasn't even done. > > Again, the Council approves most things that come down the line, > especially if it's from mgorny. > You've read this situation fairly poorly, IMO. Certainly many of mgorny's proposals have been approved by the council over the last few years, but go back and review them. They're mostly technical proposals, and I think you would agree that his proposals tend to be technically strong. I realize that isn't what you're arguing, but you can't extrapolate from a history of approving technical proposals to an assumption that the Council would approve literally any controversial social proposal he makes. I have had no access to any internal/private deliberations any members of the council have had over this issue, and the same access as you to any public statements they have made over the last few weeks. I would estimate the likely possible outcomes and their probabilities as: 0% - Splitting of gentoo-dev into two lists as proposed. 20% - no resolutions accepted this meeting 10% - A statement encouraging the moderation of the gentoo-dev list once infra can enable this. 50% - A general statement indicating that so far there hasn't actually been much significant ban evasion going on, and that for the time being asking community members to respect any bans should continue. Community members should try to abide by the comrel process, and not take matters into their own hands by participating in flame wars. Gentoo-dev should be focused on technical matters, non-technical matters ought to go to gentoo-project, and comrel is encouraged to remind individuals of when they're off-topic even if well-intentioned. 20% - No formal proposal, but an intention communicated to revive something like the proctors project to allow comrel to focus on bigger issues (harassment, ongoing patterns, etc). The proctors would be much more proactive in reaching out to community members who are abusing lists/irc/etc, and likely empowered to hand out temporary bans/etc of fairly short duration, enforced either voluntarily or using technical means (though presumably ban evasion would be viewed as a more serious offense). Knowing most of the council members reasonably well I think it is pretty unlikely that anything drastic will be done, and a few have already gone on the record publicly as not being in favor of splitting the list. > > You told me a few paragraphs ago that it wouldn't be worth it anyway, > and now you're telling me to run for the Council? Which is it? Both, these statements are not contradictory. If you feel that strongly that the Council is out of line you should run. Then you will be able to see firsthand how the rest of the community feels about your approach. I could be wrong but I think you'd be soundly defeated assuming most of the incumbents haven't left by then. >From the standpoint of getting your way it wouldn't be worth it. From the standpoint of giving everybody a chance to vote on your opinions it would be. IMO there really isn't anything you can do to get your way, because it is opposed by most of the community, albeit silently. That said, I do have to acknowledge that my email was indirect. That tends to be my style - I usually try to leave conclusions unsaid. On a list whose participants vary greatly in language skills, technical proficiency, general intelligence, value/culture, etc perhaps it really isn't the best way to communicate. (There I go again being indirect...) I need to work on that... -- Rich
