Hey, I have not been able to contribute properly to this thread so far, for personal issues, but I would like to leave my 5¢.
On 18/04/18 12:49, Ian Jackson wrote: > 6. You mention `anti-harassment' as a `lever of power" but of course > anti-harassment have no inherent authority. > > IMO the antiharassment team's members would be a good starting point > for the members of my proposed new structure. But the new structure > needs to relate entirely differently to our existing institutions. Since a few days ago, I am part of that team. I can say that I have been thinking for a long while about a-h and its (lack of) powers, although I still don't know what would be best for the future. I believe that a-h is the natural starting point for dealing with these issues. Currently, it can only give recommendations, but it is not void; and I think it will be natural that the liaison with DAM, mailing list operators, etc will only get stronger with time. > I wonder if I should propose a GR. That would provide a way of > testing whether my ideas (which do seem controversial) are more widely > held, and also if the GR passes, give clear legitimacy to the new > team. Dunno if we are at the point where a GR would be useful yet. -- Martín Ferrari (Tincho)
