On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 14:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:19 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 14:15 -0400, drew wrote: > >> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 19:23 +0200, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > we have spoken much - now its time to outline what needs to be done. I > >> > have started a Wiki page with that: > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Changes+integrate+the+forums+into+the+AOOo+project > >> > > >> > Lets bring the talk into shapes. > >> > >> Thanks for that Christian. > > > > sorry - a double post. > >> > >> My only real question is regarding the moderators needing to be part of > >> the PMC - I'm not at all sure I see that need. > > > > just to be clear - although I would encourage mod's to be in the PMC my > > question is about making it a hard requirement. > > > > I'd think of it this way: > > We don't want a stranger to walk off the street and be immediately a > moderator, right?
Of course not - why do you think folks would want that? > It requires some level of vetting. Sure - > A moderator can > ban users, Not necessarily - there is the a very granular rights system in play - not everyone with the moderator colors on their user name have the same access levels. Hagar has a higher level then most, if not all, of the other moderators for instance. > they can kick real people off the boards if they do not > like their behavior. So it is a position of authority. A Moderator is > an important role with real influence. They, through their decisions, > help set the tone of the forum and represent the "public face" of > Apache OpenOffice. So, it is very easy to setup a system where a 'standard' moderator can do x but not y - in this case can not actually ban a user - they see spam, they remove it, which automatically makes the post visible to admins and the admin's can handle the actual banning, if so warranted. > > How do we ensure, as a project, that the right people are given that > responsibility? In other words, in what way does the PPMC oversee > this? One way would be to use the committer proposal/approval > process. Something less formal, is what we do with mailing list > moderators. *chuckling* - well, the other day when I explained how it currently works and that when a moderator takes an action and this becomes visible to all the others, so that we have a way for the group to self monitor the actions of the individual I heard a bit about trust..isn't this the same situation here? > We propose a name to ooo-dev, in public, seek lazy > consensus, and then ask Apache Infra to add their names. They don't > need to be a committer, but they require nomination and lazy consensus > approval. > > -Rob > > >> > >> > >> I'm wondering if there is a particular action or actions that you feel > >> triggers this as a requirement? > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> //drew > >> > >> > > > > > > >
