[Board] Fwd: OSGeo CoC committee proposal

[Jachym Cepicky]

I understand and actually I'm resonating with Cameron's reasoning for
having small committee or .. something like having small action more-closed
action body within the rather bigger open committee. Victim deserves
protection.

I do concern about the control over the committee, if they need to hide
some of the cases, you will be (assuming) dealing with (aka "who controls
the controllers?") Could you address the point for me ? (or one more time,
if you already did in some e-mail thread or wiki). We have some not so well
experience with small action groups with rather broad powers here in
eastern Europe, therefore my concerns.

I also agree with Arnulf's point -> rather implement, then enforce

Thanks

Jachym



so 25. 7. 2015 v 13:22 odesílatel Jorge Sanz <jsanz at osgeo.org> napsal:

> 2015-07-24 14:11 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata <
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>:
> > Dear Kristen and Camille,
> > I would like to thanks you for your interest in bringing up such a kind
> of
> > important mission.
> >
> > I would 100% support the committee if its scope is to promote and
> > pro-actively take actions to let OSGeo be a respectful community.
> > Nevertheless, I think as Jeff noted, that the committee shall be fully
> open
> > to everyone interested and that no "police" role is given to it.
> >
> > In my opinion the existing laws and the already established board shall
> > handle this without recording any black-list.
> >
> > Best
> > Maxi
> >
>
> I agree with Jeff and Maxi's support on your work. An OSGeo committee
> has to be an open group, with open communications and decisions to
> support the mission it's stating. If the committee wants to maintain a
> smaller group for an specific task (and very delicate in this case)
> that's great.
>
> For example I'm part of working groups like maintaining the Foundation
> planet or administering the mailing lists server and I'm not even a
> voted member of the Systems Administration Committee, On that role I'm
> just a volunteer working with other volunteers under the "supervision"
> of a bigger group of smart and dedicated people.
>
> So why a full OSGeo Committee that has a mission to encourage
> diversity and inclusivity has to be a small closed group? Why not
> having a normal committee that appoints that working group for that
> matter (incident reports) and leave space to other tasks that lead
> this Foundation to a broader audience? There's nothing else to do to
> encourage diversity that evolving and implementing a CoC? really? I
> don't know, maybe helping the Conf and Edu Committees with ideas on
> grants and student programs for our events can be part of the scope of
> this committee.
>
> Maybe my problem is that with that mission, I imagined that committee
> more like an Outreach Committee because I want to see it in a positive
> way and a "Code of Conduct Committee" has too many negative
> implications in my head.
>
> Again, I'm grateful to all your passion and commitment on diversity
> and I expect to see great results on your work that are not related at
> all with incidents or people banned of our conferences.
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> Jorge Sanz
> http://www.osgeo.org
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz
> GPG: 86F8 3EA0 BD19 0CA2 801D  4FB2 6B45 68E4 6FB2 D89D
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20150725/57b873cd/attachment.htm>