Open Stack

Eoghan Glynn <eglynn at redhat.com> writes:

> TL;DR: how about we adopt a "soft enforcement" model, relying 
>        on sound judgement and good faith within the community?

Thank you very much for bringing this up and proposing it to the TC.  As
others have suggested, having a concrete alternative is very helpful in
revealing both the positive and negative aspects of a proposal.

I think our recent experience has shown that the fundamental problem is
that not all of the members of our community knew what kind of behavior
we expected around elections.  That's understandable -- we had hardly
articulated it.  I think the best solution to that is therefore to
articulate and communicate that.

I believe Anita's proposal starts off by doing a very good job of
exactly that, so I would like to see a final resolution based on that
approach with very similar text to what she has proposed.  That
statement of expected behavior should then be communicated by election
officials to all participants in announcements related to all elections.
Those two simple acts will, I believe, suffice to address the problem we
have seen.

I do agree that a heavy bureaucracy is not necessary for this.  Our
community has a Code of Conduct established and administered by the
Foundation.  I think we should focus on minimizing additional process
and instead try to make this effort slot into the existing framework as
easily as possible by expecting the election officials to forward
potential violations to the Foundation's Executive Director (or
delegate) to handle as they would any other potential CoC violation.

-Jim