Actually, I had no idea it was going on until very recently. It seems the initial communications were pretty much restricted to those already involved in technical areas or mailing lists.
"The community", when we're talking about something that will affect everyone, means, well, everyone who cares to participate in the discussion. The final version should be advertised as widely as possible, and the community (not a subset of it) should decide if it's acceptable. The fact that some people have participated on specific parts does not negate the need for ratification of the full and final version. Work on individual sections hammers out what you're going to present to the community. It does not bypass the need to actually do that. Todd On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Erik Bernhardson < ebernhard...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > This code has been under discussion at > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft since the > summer > > of 2015, and is finally nearing completion. The original consensus in > 2015 > > had been that the completed code would be submitted to the community for > > ratification and adoption. However, since the end of 2015 the drafting > of > > the code has largely been in the hands of a small group of WMF staff, and > > they have taken it on themselves to change that consensus and stated that > > the code will come into effect as soon as the last section is agreed, > which > > will be quite soon. > > > > Do the WMF and the wider Community wish to adhere to the initial > consensus, > > and put the draft code out to the comunity for adoption? Or will the WMF > > choose to enact it on their own authority irrespective of any community > > views on the subject? > > > > It's not particularly clear hear, which community? The developers of > mediawiki-core? extension developers? people who attend hackathons and > such? It seems all of these groups have been bombarded with calls to > participate in the process over the last year and have had plenty of > opportunity to be heard. That only a small group of WMF staff have decided > to participate, almost entirely in their free time as volunteers and not > paid employees, doesn't seem to change that. > > > > If the code is to be voted on by the Community, what would be the > > appropriate venue for the vote, and where should the vote be publicised? > > > > "Rogol" > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>