[Board] Fwd: OSGeo CoC committee proposal

[Cameron Shorter]

Embracing and extending upon David's comments,

Another reason for keeping a CoC committee small it is less threatening 
for a victim to approach a single known person than many people within a 
committee. It is a trust thing.

The reporter should have full control on how far they wish their report 
to go. If a reporter wishes to approach just one member of the CoC 
committee and requests other committee or board members not be notified, 
that should be ok.
The committee member can then explain options, which typically would 
include:

1. A discrete mention to the perpetrator that it has been noticed their 
behaviour was considered by someone as inappropriate and maybe you'd 
like to think about that in future.

2. Disciplinary action, which would first require a level of discussion 
amongst the committee, and also provide an opportunity for the accused 
to defend themselves. (I suggest follow convention of modern legal 
systems which are based on assumption of innocence until proven guilty).

3. Something in between 1 and 2.

--

With regards to structure and running of the CoC Committee, I suggest 
the committee should fit in with the official, ARTICLE VI Project 
Steering Committees, from OSGeo By Laws:
http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html

(This includes OSGeo Board oversight, which I think might address some 
of the points from the board that Jeff describes below? In particular, 
the board would be able to appoint people onto the CoC Committee.)

Warm regards,

Cameron

On 25/07/2015 4:11 am, David William Bitner wrote:
> Jeff & Board members,
>
> Thanks for feedback. A few of my thoughts with regards to the 
> clarifications from the Board.
>
> I think that it is critical that the /front line/ (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.
>
> 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.
>
> David
>
>
>
>     ****
>      - Board appreciates proposed CoC committee
>        - 2 points must be clarified:
>           1) changes needed to structure:
>               - there should be no limitation on # of members (as
>     other committees)
>               - need to name chair of committee
>               - should propose/vote in new members
>           2) changes needed to scope:
>               - committee reports about CoC incidents to privately
>     (board-priv mailing list)
>               - actions are only taken by the OSGeo Board
>     ****
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20150725/bbcee568/attachment.htm>