openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Terry Ellison <>
Subject Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2011 07:35:48 GMT
On 04/09/11 23:22, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 4 September 2011 22:37, Terry Ellison<>  wrote:
>> On 04/09/11 22:13, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Sep 4, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Terry Ellison<>
> ...
>>> If several members of the PPMC are participating as forum volunteers and
>>> all the conversations in these private lists are immutable and available to
>>> the whole PPMC and Apache Members why would we need a feed to ooo-private?
>>> This really isn't any different from the PPMC trusting a small number of ML
>>> moderators.
>> One specific technical point:  the content of no forums or posts is
>> immutable.  Originators and moderators can change their content or even
>> withdraw it by deleting the post.  We do this regularly with spam.  No forum
>> models that I am familiar with embeds versioning.
> One of the reasons for allowing Member level access to PMC lists is to
> ensure that there is some way to escalate a dispute to an independent
> third party. This happens very rarely, but when it does it really is
> not fun for the people involved, as you can imagine.
> One other reason (which fortunately is even rarer) is that we
> sometimes need to provide materials as part of some court case or
> other. IN these circumstances lawyers spend a long time ensuring that
> no unnecessary information is shared and that private information is
> provided with the appropriate confidences.
> Requiring those people to trawl logs to ensure no edits have been made
> in private discussions is adding unnecessary work that, I hope, can be
> avoided.
> Would it be possible/make sense to provide a read-only archive of the
> private forums in the private PMC list? I'm not saying discussion
> should necessarily move to that list (although I think this should be
> the end goal, but lets take baby steps and keep options open). This
> approach would have the added benefit of providing PPMC oversight on
> the private discussions.
> I'm not concerned about edits in public posts, particularly with the
> existing practice of marking such posts as edited.
> Ross
Yes it is technically possible to do this Ross.  The short term 
constraint is a matter of scheduling resource to this.

View raw message