My tl;dr comment is that if this is clearly marketed as a "pilot" then I fully, 100% support it, though I will echo the concern that this overloads the Reps Council - in the long run it might make sense for another group of people to be delegated this authority.
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 4:15 AM, Benjamin Kerensa <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
