New roles in the Ubuntu IRC team

[Melissa Draper]

Greets,

I have serious doubts that appointing "champions" is going to achieve anything.

tl;dr version:

If we need to have appointed representatives to ensure that topical
issues get heard, then there is something wrong with the IRCC itself.
Indeed, we have already had people taking responsibility for promoting
certain issues to the IRCC and attempting to ensure the following up
of said issues, self appointed champions of a cause so to speak.
They've come away disappointed.

Long version:

There is something about the current IRCC that is not working, and
that much is quite clear. Speaking to experience from within, the
current team is very closed. There have been points at which incumbent
IRCC members have not had the benefit of all the information regarding
a situation before a decision has been made, and has led to
unsatisfactory decisions being made by the IRCC who has then been
exceedingly dismissive of the response, up to and including what
amounts to responses of "you will live with this decision and you will
learn to like it because we know better".

Creating a situation where focus areas are managed by a champion or
whatever you want to call "a representative of a focus area" are not
going to solve this because quite frankly, people already do this of
their own accord right now and it really isn't making a difference
right now. The result has been much more along the lines of a staring
contest:
* someone raises an issue,
* they're told to add it to a meeting agenda,
* they add it to a meeting agenda and turn up,
* there's some discussion where the status quo is defended because of
either existing written policy which didn't consider a situation
* or a lack of written policy,
* time runs out and the discussion is deferred,
* rinse and repeat steps 3, 4 and 5.
* If the initiator goes off and writes even moar policy document, they
get zero assistance from the IRCC and are expected to wait until
meetings for actual feedback.
* If after 6 months (or more, not an exaggeration) of this the shiny
new policy gets voted in, then the IRC team as a whole doesn't get
informed properly, because everyone reads meeting minutes, right?
* Cue the policy document not actually having any effect whatsoever
* and the IRCC shrugging when asked why.

I'm curious as to how the act of appointing specific people to do this
is going to change things. Will the turnaround be quicker. If so, why?
We should be listening to all our operators input, not just the ones
who are appointed to special roles.

We should be leading by example and taking responsibility ourselves
rather than handing it out. We shouldn't be setting things up so we
can dust our hands when things fall flat because we gave the
responsibility of ensuring the success of a particular aspect of our
jurisdiction away.

Leadership is about enabling those we are appointed to lead. We should
be listening above all else. We should be actively discussing issues
with the team members who approach us with a problem, not asking that
they go away and come back with a complete solution for us to
rubber-stamp. We should be making sure that people who are affected by
changes are aware of them and have input into the transition as a
forethought not an afterthought.

If making these 'official' positions is what it takes to get these
focus areas some actual assistance and encouragement, then the issue
isn't with a lack of another layer of office or bureaucracy, the issue
lies with the current layer of office and it's that which needs to be
changed.

As for changing the name of the meeting; it shouldn't be limited to the IRCC.

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Jussi Schultink <jussi01 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> One of the criticisms the IRCC has received recently is the lack of
> interaction with the IRC team in terms of decision making, as well as
> the lack of things getting done. There has been a lack of teamwork to
> get things done, as well as a lack of communication.
>
> I would like to propose some new roles within the IRC team to help get
> more stuff done that also have the added benefits of communication
> improvement and teamwork.
>
> I would like to see "champions" for several areas that need taking
> care of within the team. These "champions" would be responsible for
> awareness in the team of their area, as well as ensuring tasks get
> followed up on. (the champion doesn't have to do all the work, just
> ensure that it gets done)
>
> The champion would also have a lot of input into the overall direction
> of what happens with that area of the IRC team, thus these roles would
> give people an opportunity to have a real impact on the team and its
> direction. There could be more than one champion for each role.
>
> I would propose the following areas to have champions, but please feel
> free to suggest other areas - especially if you are willing to take up
> the role.
>
>  *Bots & bot direction (Specifications, idea management, perhaps some
> implementation)
>  *Ban list maintenance/eir care (everybody would be still responsible
> for bans, but this person would be ensuring the ban list does not get
> overfull, ensuring new ops get proper eir training, following up on
> any bugs in eir)
>  *Documentation review (reviewing the wiki and other documentation on
> a regular basis)
>  *Channel list review (Reviewing the channel list of our namespace
> channels for stale and/or inappropriate channels)
>  *Factoid Maintenance and review (reviewing factoids and checking for
> old and outdated factoids on a regular basis, updating factoids).
>  *Policy review (reviewing policies for efficiency, usefulness,
> scale-ability, suggestions of changes to policy)
>
> Again, I want to stress that the champion doesn't need to do all the
> work, just follow up and ensure it gets done.
>
> Also, as part of this, I would like to change the IRCC meeting name to
> IRC Team meeting, and have the champions be a part of the meeting when
> appropriate, to bring things that need changing to the attention of
> the IRC team and the IRC council.
>
> The IRC Council's role in all of this would be to approve changes to
> policy and set out a long term plan for growth and maintenance of the
> IRC team, in consultation with the IRC team and the champions.
>
> I would like to hear all constructive thoughts on this route, be they
> positive or negative.
>
> I would like this to be a part of our long term plans to be discussed
> in the UDS, following discussion on the mailing list and hopefully
> also in the next IRCC meeting this Sunday.
>
> BR
>
> Jussi
>