incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Proposal: Forum integration
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2011 18:56:35 GMT
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:45 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 14:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:19 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 14:15 -0400, drew wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 19:23 +0200, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > we have spoken much - now its time to outline what needs to be done.
I
>> >> > have started a Wiki page with that:
>> >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Changes+integrate+the+forums+into+the+AOOo+project
>> >> >
>> >> > Lets bring the talk into shapes.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for that Christian.
>> >
>> > sorry - a double post.
>> >>
>> >> My only real question is regarding the moderators needing to be part of
>> >> the PMC - I'm not at all sure I see that need.
>> >
>> > just to be clear - although I would encourage mod's to be in the PMC my
>> > question is about making it a hard requirement.
>> >
>>
>> I'd think of it this way:
>>
>> We don't want a stranger to walk off the street and be immediately a
>> moderator, right?
>
> Of course not - why do you think folks would want that?
>
>> It requires some level of vetting.
>
> Sure -
>
>> A moderator can
>> ban users,
>
> Not necessarily - there is the a very granular rights system in play -
> not everyone with the moderator colors on their user name have the same
> access levels. Hagar has a higher level then most, if not all, of the
> other moderators for instance.
>
>
>> they can kick real people off the boards if they do not
>> like their behavior. So it is a position of authority.  A Moderator is
>> an important role with real influence.  They, through their decisions,
>> help set the tone of the forum and represent the "public face" of
>> Apache OpenOffice.
>
> So, it is very easy to setup a system where a 'standard' moderator can
> do x but not y - in this case can not actually ban a user - they see
> spam, they remove it, which automatically makes the post visible to
> admins and the admin's can handle the actual banning, if so warranted.
>

This is good to know.  That essentially creates super-moderators and
normal moderators.  Is there anything else like this?  I mean is there
a short list of permission sets like this, or is it really an eclectic
mix of permissions that have been assigned to individuals over time
and few moderators actually have the same identical permissions?

>>
>> How do we ensure, as a project, that the right people are given that
>> responsibility?  In other words, in what way does the PPMC oversee
>> this?  One way would be to use the committer proposal/approval
>> process.  Something less formal, is what we do with mailing list
>> moderators.
>
> *chuckling* - well, the other day when I explained how it currently
> works and that when a moderator takes an action and this becomes visible
> to all the others, so that we have a way for the group to self monitor
> the actions of the individual I heard a bit about trust..isn't this the
> same situation here?
>

It is.  But ordinarily the PPMC elects those they trust.  Trust is
given and powers are delegated to those it elects as Committers and
PPMC members.


>>  We propose a name to ooo-dev, in public, seek lazy
>> consensus, and then ask Apache Infra to add their names.  They don't
>> need to be a committer, but they require nomination and lazy consensus
>> approval.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I'm wondering if there is a particular action or actions that you feel
>> >> triggers this as a requirement?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> //drew
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message