On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Majken Connor <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think we were in agreement on Reps getting email addresses. Two parts > stalled: > > 1. How to actually give out the mailboxes > 2. When we expand to allow non-Reps contributors to have the addresses (as > we agreed that contributors besides Reps have earned them) how do we have a > clear definition for non-Reps contributors that being a member of the Reps > program automatically provides Reps. > So I think the second issue could be something that could be decided later and brought back to MozGov or even defined through normal ReMo Governance later. I think getting to the point that Reps can get an address through a process alone is a great step forward. The first issue is simple because once we have consensus that were going to move forward with this the request is really as simple as ReMo Governance having a process and then once someone is approved a bug can be filed with the appropriate component and IT can create an aliases. I think looking back at the discussions there was overwhelmingly more support for then against but the issue seems to be that because this is not an asset controlled by ReMo that a decision maker like Mitchell or someone further up the Mozilla ecosystem needs to sign off on this "Hey look we have a consensus and so yes were going to do this" and give a blessing officially here in the discussion. > > I don't remember which parts we agreed on, but there were some discussions > about whether or not the email address be revoked. I *believe* we agreed > that the address only be revoked in the case of abuse, ie, if you earned > it, even if you stopped being a contributor, you could keep it. > > The beauty of starting out with granting email addresses to Reps, is that > we could work out the policy on abuse and if you get to keep the address > before expanding. Reps would be the pilot. > > +1 > > Council and module peers will not be able to police use of email addresses > in the sense of doing any sort of monitoring to watch for abuses. They > would be able though to respond to complaints. I don't believe Council > should be solely responsible for setting policy around this either. I > assume there are usage guidelines for employees? Perhaps Council could be > consulted to see if any changes in that policy would be needed to make the > email use suitable for volunteers. > > Remember that council is only 9 people, 7 of whom are volunteers and all > are already doing plenty to manage the Reps program. > > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
