#71: IRC SIG reform ---------------------+--------------------- Reporter: be0 | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------+--------------------- Comment (by langdon): Just a comment as I was at least one of the people suggesting "reporting" in the council meeting. And, to clarify, what I meant was non-anonymized reporting of the person *doing* the banning not the banned. Basically to have visibility in to the enforcement of policy, with visibility attached, because there seems to be a breakdown in "over-enforcement" which is what lead to some of this discussion. re: Kevin's comments I would say that the ops have perms/policy/whatnot to be the fall back moderator if there is no one in channel from the outreach orgs. Basically, what I really want here is, most of the time, is a two-phase commit on enforcement actions and people who have actively chosen to do outreach to do the first wave of discussion. However, the outreach people are not ops people and we don't have to make the rules draconian as long as it works most of the time. i agree with you on elections definite +1 on the "pull irc sig/tickets in to commops meetings" +1 on "more friendly people might just solve this" re: Phanes comments I agree with your two comments. And, I think that means you don't have to mention the part where you made the mistake anymore as a result ;) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/71#comment:12> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
