Re: Meeting Minutes Published - October 29, 2009

[Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>]

On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 21:01 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>
> wrote:
>           There is no official enforcement of these principles
>         
>         unless the CoC gets an official enforcement (and this
>         paragraph is
>         removed) any requirement on having members sign the CoC page
>         is a
>         pointless exercise.
> 
> 
> What kind of enforcement would you like to see? A public shaming?
> Temporarily suspension of Planet privileges? Would the membership
> committee be a good place to do this?

I'm not interested in public shaming; what I'm interested in is that
there is a well-defined, possibly quick way for foundation members (and
non-members as well) to report and have addressed CoC violations.

currently it's all over the place: bugzilla is policed by the bug
masters, the planet is policed by its editors, the mailing lists are
policed by the lists maintainers, IRC is policed by the people in
#opers. I might happen to know this but it's not explicitly defined
anywhere; and even if it were, the sentence up there makes reporting
seem a moot point.

if we want to have the CoC as a binding contract for foundation members
then yes: I agree that the membership committee should be the official
contact for requests of enforcement.

ciao,
 Emmanuele.