IrcCouncilChanges: Decision making & coverage.

Tue Dec 8 11:48:48 UTC 2009

Hi Joe,

Many thanks for your input so far, its been useful and I think we can get
something worked out.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Joseph Price <pricechild at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> 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.
>
>  I see your point now, and it certainly needs clarification. Perhaps you
could submit a suggestion that words it better?

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?
>

A definate +1 on making the GRF contents public and clear. again, your
thoughts here and ideas would be most appreciated. I think these things do
need thinking through, but the ideas also need to come from the community as
well as those on the councils. In regards to #mythbuntu-*, their channel
name is #ubuntu-mythtv. Whether we need to cover #mythbuntu-* is a good
question, but on first thought, I don't think so.

Once again, thanks for the time and effort you've put in to write to and
collaborate with us.

Jussi

>
> 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
>
> --
> Ubuntu-irc mailing list
> Ubuntu-irc at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-irc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-irc/attachments/20091208/150c346f/attachment.html>