Community Council meeting 6 dec 2005

Matthew East mdke at ubuntu.com
Thu Dec 8 23:13:51 GMT 2005


Rob, you got the sounder address wrong, reposting to the list. Sorry if
it's difficult to read: my email client has a permanent disagreement
with yours ;p

On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 08:53 +1000, Stoffers, Robert LAC wrote:
> > 
> > > It is clear that the CC has little knowledge of how the forums
work and
> > > that this needs to change.
> > 
> > That certainly is part of th problem. Another part is that some
people,
> > who may or may not be Forum admins, seem to think that the CoC does
> > not apply to them.
> 
> >Some extremely good progress is being made on this issue, in fact it
> >seems to me that a CC meeting is unlikely to be necessary to resolve
it.
> >
> >http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=100069
> 
> 
> I like the proposal of a "resolution centre" in the first instance
then escalated to the CC if needed. It is also a good thing to see that
deleting posts will be frond upon, but is there a link to the forum
guidelines? I think a link to the guidelines needs to be placed in the
top or bottom banner so it is easily accessible for all, but other then
that I am happy with this outcome. I hope they choose to base the new
guidelines off the Ubuntu CoC and use the CoC as a fall back in the
wording of them.
> 
> I still maintain my position that the forum administrators need to be
an official team, and that at least the core people responsible for the
forums need to have at least signed the CoC. I would also like to see
the forums moved to an open source solution (but I understand the
difficulties in doing such a thing), and I would like to see
forums.ubuntu.com pointing to the forums.

Most of this has all been discussed on that thread. Some of it has been
done for ages: there is a link at the top of the forums to the
guidelines (just look at the page dude!), and the forum administrators
are all Ubuntu members, and have therefore signed the Code of Conduct.
The code has been reflected in the forum guidelines for users and staff
for some time.

The tricky part is getting everyone to comply with it: some of the ideas
on that thread should go a long way to ensuring that, in my opinion.

The personal squabbling that has brought this issue to the fore will not
go away, people are too personally involved to just realise that the
bigger picture is: issues became obvious, both sides (at least on that
thread I linked) have listened to each other, changes have been made. I
remain confident that the Community Council is probably not even
required to address this issue, given that the forums are implementing a
complaints procedure, and guideline changes. However, I have no doubt
that some of the individuals concerned will not be able to let go, but
hopefully this will die out gradually.

Matt 
-- 
mdke at ubuntu.com
gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/attachments/20051208/b7dcf8e2/attachment.pgp


More information about the sounder mailing list
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2005-December/003359.html
lists.ubuntu.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-22
6204
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:23T3BI6H7CN3VHCBOQWUF3RYI5NP7HZI
<urn:uuid:4b1ccf6d-9f00-4879-b047-9c20c9e0d2db>
2019-05-19T07:28:31Z
91.189.94.20
text/html
sha1:ZPFIMUOZOVFGBEGMXM5STYSMEYUHFA3M
<urn:uuid:b0e33ae6-2dab-4833-a136-bc67f36065f0>
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2005-December/003359.html
response
<urn:uuid:dc22f8ca-9c9e-487b-b689-e57b0f23d68a>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-22
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-171-61-111.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/