Brian Pepple wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:33 PM, inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I don't really think without a more clearly defined set of >> responsibilities for such a group there can be much sensible >> discussion of its composition. You mention a mediation role but I >> could imagine the CWG taking on a broader function than just dispute >> mediation. One of keeping an eye on the overall health of the >> community and one of intervening in problem pockets before there is a >> big fuss that escalates out of control. One of taking action to help >> foster healthy communities as opposed to one of reacting to problems >> after the fact. Something to think about in addition to dispute >> mediation maybe? > > When the CWG was formed, it given a one year term with the initial > goal of determining whether a COC/enforcement guidelines were needed, > and then afterwards work on helping to maintain a friendly and > welcoming community. Sadly, somewhere along line, the Board felt the > CWG wasn't need any longer and started discussing disbanding it. I'm sorry if anyone got that impression that the board as a whole is doing anything resembling discussing disbanding the cwg. I, for one, have done no such thing and continue to firmly believe in the importance of the cause behind why the cwg was chartered and hope the group will continue to serve effectively. -- Rex _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
