IrcCouncilChanges: Delegation, Contact & Disputes

[Jussi Schultink]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Tony Yarusso <tonyyarusso at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Joseph Price <pricechild at ubuntu.com>
> wrote:
> > "Ops are welcome to apply for a role on the council and retain their
> > Op status, but they are also informed that in the interests of having
> > a separation of power, they also have the opportunity to step down as
> > an Op temporarily."
> >
> > We aren't forcing anybody to be an op here? People can step down
> > whenever they want (as long as they are considerate in doing so of
> > course)
> >
> > People also don't have to use their access if they don't want to.
> > Nobody has to get involved in a situation if they don't want to.
> >
> > This line is extremely confusing to me. What does it mean? Why is it
> here?
> >
> > In short.. my big question to whoever wrote it is... "What issue is it
> > designed to resolve?"
>
> I didn't write this and don't remember this in-context, but I would
> guess that there are two parts to it:
> 1)  We don't really have a precedent for "suspension" of membership.
> In the past we've only had people either resign or just become less
> active.
> 2)  Simply choosing not to act on things generally doesn't give the
> same *external* appearance wrt conflict of interest as being unable
> to.
>
> I suspect what whomever wrote that meant is that there should be a way
> of visibly giving up rights, ie actually losing access and membership
> in ubuntu-irc, such that the whole world can see that they are only
> focusing on their IRCC duties and have separated themself from normal
> operation, while still having a guarantee of that access being
> restored at the end of their two-year term.  Conflict of interest
> concerns are about appearances - a perceived conflict of interest is
> as much a concern as an actual one, so some people may wish to do
> everything they can to minimize the appearance of one, without
> completely abandoning a community they care about through a permanent
> resignation.
>

Tony, you are pretty close here, the idea to me at least is that there is a
visible laying down of operator privileges in a "front line" sense if need
be. The IRCC is always going to have operator privileges, as they are GC's
and its very important that they are able to manage the channels as
necessary.

Hope this helps

Jussi.

>  - Tony Yarusso
>
> --
> 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/20091209/c68c79f3/attachment.html>