IrcCouncilChanges: Decision making & coverage.

[Joseph Price]

Howdy jussi. No, i don't think that the current wording produces
quorum. It does require more than half the council to vote. It does
not require more than half to vote one way. As you can see from my
earlier example, this allows, and HAS allowed decisions to be made by
only 2 people voting in favour, to the frustration of others.

As for the trademark policy, i don't want to see the council become
aggressive in its management of our namespaces. I would like the
contents of our GRF to be made clear to our community, (and if
necessary, amend it.) i think we shouldn't decide what projects can
and can't use our namespaces, rather assist with problems and resolve
issues within our scope when required. We are operators, not
moderators. That scope needs to be made explicit though. Is
#mythbuntu-* part of it?

On 12/8/09, Jussi Schultink <jussi01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, just want to go through all the points here, so Ill be cutting a little:
>
>> "Decisions will be made by a majority of voting IRC Council members
>> when at least three and more than half of the total members have
>> voted."
>
> Does this not imply quorum? ie. at _least_ 3 and more than half of the
> _total_ members? So, if we have 5 on the council, then 3 need to vote in
> favour. if we have 6, then 4. If we have 2... we don't have a meeting - as
> has been done so far, and is one of the reasons Ive been pushing the
> Community council to get this done.
>
>> As I understand it, the Scope page defines what core channels the IRCC
>> > are *directly* responsible for:
>> >
>> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcTeam/Scope
>> That defines what the IRC team is responsible for. With their GC
>> status, the IRCC actually covers a *LOT* more. Of course they don't
>> actually micromanage the whole thing, but they can help out when
>> needed.
>>
>> > I also know that "officially according to freenode" the IRCC is
>> > responsible for the -ubuntu namespace, but it turns out I don't know
>> > how far that extends or what "governance" role the IRCC has over these
>> > (now hundreds?) of channels. I agree that clarifying this for everyone
>> > would be worthwhile.
>>
>> The Ubuntu IRC Council actually has a GRF with freenode that cover the
>> channels #ubuntu-*, #kubuntu-*....... and so on for several key
>> subprojects of the Ubuntu community. I don't think that the CC
>> appreciates these extents/limits of (our) group registration and would
>> welcome any and all questions that you guys have. Reading the page I
>> linked to earlier would be a great start, as well as confirming with
>> our current GCs exactly what channels their forms cover.
>>
>> In the past, those lines have been interpreted as to only mean the
>> Ubuntu distribution, rather than the Ubuntu community (including
>> kubuntu etc.) I think that this distinction between the different uses
>> of the word 'Ubuntu' must be made clear in writing from the start as
>> to avoid further problems.
>>
>> As I understand it, our "Ubuntu"  group covers #ubuntu-*, #kubuntu-*
> #xubuntu-* and #ubuntuforums (correct me if I am wrong). This means that we,
> (Pici and I, as group contacts) are responsible for maintaining these
> namespaces and the channels within. Now quite conceivably this can and does
> cover hundreds of channel - and there is absolutely no way we can be in, or
> monitor all of these channels.
>
> However, I do believe this can be dealt with, perhaps using the trademark
> policy as a starting point - which Mark Shuttleworth suggested a long time
> ago to the IRCC in another discussion. I think the trademark policy actually
> has some very useful wording here:
>
> "Canonical owns a number of trademarks and these include UBUNTU, KUBUNTU,
> EDUBUNTU, and XUBUNTU. The trademarks are registered in both word and logo
> form. Any mark ending with the letters UBUNTU or BUNTU is sufficiently
> similar to one or more of the trademarks that permission will be needed in
> order to use it. This policy encompasses all marks, in word and logo form,
> collectively referred to as “Trademarks”."
> ...
> "there is no suggestion (through words or appearance) that your project is
> approved, sponsored, or affiliated with Ubuntu or its related projects
> unless it has been approved by and is governed by the Ubuntu Community
> Council."
>
> http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
>
> Now, that suggests the projects that are approved by the CC, fall under the
> community council governance, so therefore under the delegated governance
> councils under this. It would make sense then that any of these approved
> projects channels and sub channels should be governed by the IRCC.
>
> So, perhaps this could be a good starting point for our discussions.
>
> Jussi.
>
>>  --
>> Ubuntu-irc mailing list
>> Ubuntu-irc at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-irc
>>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device