[ciphershed] Re: Transparency
- From: "Jason Pyeron" <jpyeron@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:19:22 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alain Forget
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 14:01
>
> Hm, this is an excellent point, to which I can think of two
> possible solutions:
I would ask, what would Apache do?
>
> A) We somehow come to a consensus as to precisely what
> "tipping point" the community should become involved in any
> informal discussions any member of the CipherShed community
> is having with other parties. This tipping point could be:
> Ai) Immediately; we tell the other party to post on our
> mailing list to ensure everyone is always included, and that
> there is an open and archived record of everything for all to see.
This is the least practical.
> Aii) Only once the CipherShed member feels there is alignment
> and/or an actual potential impact to the project (rather than
> just talk). This is the fuzziest (most open to said member's
> judgement), and thus could still be problematic in the future.
This is the most practical to implement, may be not the best.
> Aiii) Only once there is a firm proposal by the CipherShed
> member and the other party (although the CipherShed member
> doesn't necessarily need to endorse the proposal, but at
> least share it with the community to solicit responses).
Can you define firm? I don't see this as very different from Aii.
>
> B) We appoint 1-3 people as points of contact for these
> matters, as a spokeperson, public relations, or whatever
> title as the point of contact. Any other community member who
Again, look to apache, http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html &
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html. You
elect a PMC Chair, they govern they project, the chair is elected from the
project's members.
> is contacted by outside parties should route said party to
> these PR people. If there are more than one PR person, they
> should *all* be involved in any discussions with outside
"all" - That may not be practical either.
> parties. These people should have a deep understanding of the
> project and community goals (and keep in close tune with them
> as it evolves), be able to articulate them, and regardless of
> their own personal viewpoint, they should be able to
> anticipate the community's response to particular proposals
> by outside parties when interacting with them, so that the
> community needn't be consulted on every little thing, which
> has the added benefit of allowing devs and others to focus on
> furthering CipherShed without these discussion distractions,
> until they become very relevant and may bear some fruit.
Good point.
> Obviously, the community must trust these people to represent
> the community accurately and as unbiased as possible, and to
> give outside parties a good impression of our community/project.
See above comment about election.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- -
- Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 -
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 -
- -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.
Other related posts:
