>> i just wanted to outline that a forum is already extraordinary for >> support questions. Using message boards for support questions but not >> using it to ban users from the same board sounds strange. >> > Banning a user is just pressing a button. The technology does not > require a discussion. Same as mailing lists. A list moderator can > kick out a user without having a discussion.
Of course banning a user is clicking a button, but I didn't mean that we need to discuss HOW to click that button. The discussion is around IF. > However, our process may > require more deliberation. So it is then a question of: > > 1) Where does this deliberation occur? > 2) And does it require confidential treatment? > > We have several places where abusive behavior could happen, for example: > > 1) On mailing lists > 2) On the community wiki > 3) On the support forums > 4) On the IRC channel > > Do we really want a proliferation of private venue for discussing user > behavior? A different one for each technology? Do you really want to discuss a users behavior in public? Wow, I really don't want to do that. I strongly believe that only a few people would discuss another guys behavior in public. >From the list above IRC channel is not sufficient, because you cannot refer to something. Wiki - if a user trolls a forum, he will probably terrorize the wiki when his name occurs. >> For the quote I used I would like to refer you to this excellent slides: >> http://bit.ly/rkUbSM >> >> Anyway: all projects decisions should happen on list and not on Jabber >> or on a message board. >> I am doubting the banning of a user is a "real" project decision. > > When Drew described the use of one of the private support forums he wrote: > > "Rounding out this group of boards is the actual moderator board and that > is where these peer reviews and discussion on specific posts by named > users takes place. Although anyone can bring up whatever topic they want > on that board." > > So it is not just banning users. It sounds rather open-ended, Thanks for quoting. I think (and I wrote that already) only moderation related topics can/should be discussed in the moderation area. > I'm sure that you've observed, as I have, that new podlings tend to > over-user their private lists, that without regular reminders and > correction from Mentors, there is a tendency to discuss things in > private, not because it is necessary, not because it is confidential, > but merely to avoid controversy, to avoid public viewing of project > disagreements. Mentors and others try to correct this, because they > know that it is important for projects to work transparently. I have not made the experience. All the podlings I was in touch with have made it pretty prober from the beginning. I agree it is important to work transparent but there are some topics which cause only grief and pain when discussed in public. I even know projects who discuss committer nominations & votes in private - and thats ok. I also think that the ooo podling is different to all other podlings. Transparency is key, I do not doubt this. But discussing someone else in public can only lead to anger. > Remember also that the forum moderators, for the most part, are not > PPMC members. They have not worked on the private list, nor have they > received the constant reminders that we need to operate transparently. > They are like the PPMC was on our first day. Question: is there not a single PPMC member on the moderation queue of the forum? If there are PPMC members on the forum, then it is pretty fine - they can oversee the topics and bring them to public. If not than you have lots of trusted individuals - committers - who should be able to do the same. Again, what actually are the use cases for this private moderation forum? At the moment I have only: - deleting spam posts - banning users What else? I believe forum moderators can make sure that nothing else is discussed there. >> On your example, if you are paying developers for proprietary code or >> sell CDs outside the ASF and donate the money - why not? You should >> just respect the branding requirements and do it on your own. >> > > Irrelevant, since the support forums will soon be part of the project, You brought up this rhetoric question - I thought I need to answer it. > running on Apache infrastructure, under PPMC oversight., They are not > independent. The way in which users are treated will reflect on the > project and on Apache overall. The support forums are part of the > "public face" of the project. We should be ensuring that this public > face reflects project and Apache values, including transparency. +1 I think transparency is given, even when spam posts and troll users are discussed in private on the message board. > I'm not comfortable saying that non-PPMC members will be having > private discussions about our users, in 30 different private forums, > and deciding among themselves what users will be banned or not, all > without PPMC oversight. Aha, thats another point! Now you are saying that PPMC must have the chance to agree with a lazy consens on a ban. > In other words, how do we ensure that the support forums reflect > Apache and project values if the moderation occurs in private, by > non-PPMC members, not appointed by the PPMC, without PPMC oversight? What, if a the click on the "ban" button does send an email to the private@ mailinglist? As I heard it is the phpBB board which is used, so only a online is necessary for that. It would also conform to "commit then review"guidelines. ;-) It would be good, if the click on the ban button needs a ban comment - to my knowledge this comment is already implemented in phpBB. The comment point to a discussion thread in which the moderators have discussed their action. Any PPMC can then have an oversight on this. Of course, all moderation actions allowed for that board need a similar functionality. In addition, I think it is possible to send "new topics" in a moderation board to the private list. Then the PPMC is even aware of newly starting discussions and can follow if they want. What do you think about that? Cheers Christian > > -Rob > -- http://www.grobmeier.de
