I am now quite confused. Are we supposed to ask very specific questions about 
OTRS hoping to get an answer because if the questions are too generic for sure 
we will never get a lot of answers? is that the general idea?

ok if it helps, here are some of them
1. are OTRS policies categorized somehow? is there a page with instruction with 
how to handle mails from private companies, from people, mails of legal issues, 
mail about copyright etc2. how are OTRS agents reviewed? is it a peer-review 
process? is it regularly done?3. do we have a policy that impose a minimal 
constant activity on content-reòated platform to keep OTRS flag? 
4. how can a normal user file a request to deflag another operator?5. is there 
a open log of OTRS requests, some place where minimal information related to a 
ticket can be disclosed (for example the date of arrival and maybe if it is 
regarding some content or some other topic?)6. is there a open log of OTRS 
operators, where we can see when they got the flag, a link to the request and 
how many queue they are handling?
I think it's enough for now.

Alex
   Il lunedì 20 luglio 2020, 00:01:56 CEST, effe iets anders 
<effeietsand...@gmail.com> ha scritto:  
 
 On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:55 AM Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 09:03, effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I rather have
> > that people make their assumptions explicit so that you have an
> opportunity
> > to clarify, and use that as the basis for further conversation.
>
> You seem to be assuming - wrongly - that I have made assumptions which
> I have not made explicit.
>
> Ironically, you have not explicitly stated your assumption.
>
> > My reading of this discussion is that there is a lot of 'secrecy' assumed
>
> No secrecy is being assumed. Too much secrecy is being observed.
>
> > where it is probably more a lack of existence of policies in the way Andy
> > would like them to exist. This is a known problem with OTRS.
>
> It may well be that some policies that should exist, do not, or are
> ''de facto'' without being written down. But until we see a
> comprehensive list of those that do exist and are written, how can we
> know?
>
> > I feel comfortable sharing that the set of OTRS-wide 'policies' that is
> on
> > the wiki, is probably of little interest to this matter.
>
> I am very interested in seeing all those 'policies'; as others have
> said they are.
>
> As noted earlier in this thread, I do not see how I could be any more
> clear about my wish to see them.
>
> > This is why I
> > noted that Jonatan's response could be misleading, because it implies all
> > kind of secrecy that doesn't exist.
>
> It stated, not implied, that "the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS
> agents sign" prevented him from answering some of the questions asked
> on-wiki in February, and quoted at the start of this thread.
>
> > There are actually a few policies
> > linked at [[m:OTRS <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS>]], that are
> > simply copied there (Access, Activity policies).
>
> That page, and those linked from it, do not answer the questions to
> which I have already referred.
>
> > There is some stuff about
> > privacy, confidentiality and how to deal with mailing lists. Imho nothing
> > that exciting.
>
> Perhaps not exciting to you; but I and others argue that such content
> should nonetheless be public. We have been told that OTRS agents are
> discussing the matter on their private email and IRC channels, but
> then... Nothing.
>
> > OTRS is an immensely diverse system, and I don't think it's helpful to
> try
> > to analyze that with overly broad questions.
>
> I do not accept that questions such as, for example:
>
>    5 how is OTRS overseen, and who by?
>
>    7 what is the process for the community to remove an
>      individual's OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold
>      or abide by policy?
>
>    9 which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent,
>      or remove their permissions?
>
>    10 how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen?
>
> are "overly broad"; but if you think they are, how would you narrow their
> focus?
>
>
First of all: you're framing my words and taking them out of context. I'm
not going to waste further energy on that.

Answering that would require me to actually understand what the underlying
issue is that you want to solve. I've given up on that.

Lodewijk


> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to