<div dir="ltr">Jeff & Board members,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for feedback. A few of my thoughts with regards to the clarifications from the Board.</div><div><br></div><div>I think that it is critical that the <i>front line</i> (ie those who we are setting up to be on the receiving end of potential incidents) be a very limited group of people. While with the structure being proposed in the clarification allows for the ultimate decision of any enforcement to be made by the board, it does not allow for the committee to privately collect (and potentially anonymize) any reports. We still need to have a very small group of people who are entrusted to be that front line. We also need to allow for the case where a CoC committee member OR a board member may be on the receiving end of a complaint. If we maintain a separate private (perhaps subset or executive committee of the CoC comm) list for reporting of incidents, then if there was ever a complaint about a CoC comm member, someone could submit directly to the Board-priv list, while if there was a complaint about a Board member they could submit to the CoC-priv.</div><div><br></div><div>Having a coc-priv list with a very limited number of people is absolutely critical, in my opinion, to making this work whether any enforcement decisions are made by CoC comm or the Board.</div><div><br></div><div>David</div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
****<br>
- Board appreciates proposed CoC committee<br>
- 2 points must be clarified:<br>
1) changes needed to structure:<br>
- there should be no limitation on # of members (as other committees)<br>
- need to name chair of committee<br>
- should propose/vote in new members<br>
2) changes needed to scope:<br>
- committee reports about CoC incidents to privately (board-priv mailing list)<br>
- actions are only taken by the OSGeo Board<br>
****<br><br></blockquote></div>
</div></div>