Hi all,
I have serious concerns about the current membership of the anti-harassment team. Specifically, I notice that Molly recently joined the team and she is also a member of the Outreach team. This is not a personal attack on Molly, I simply believe that for various reasons being in both teams at the same time is incompatible for anybody. At this particular moment, we also had some communications issues in the GSoC team in 2018 and on that basis, I don't feel it would be appropriate for any member of that team to suddenly transition to anti-harassment. No individual member of the team deserves to be blamed or scapegoated for that, all members of the team have some responsibility for it. So this is not specific to Molly, we would all be ineligible. It just makes me feel really uncomfortable when one member of the Outreach team might have been used as a scapegoat to sacrifice on the high alter of Google and another attends the GSoC mentor summit and then immediately jumps to anti-harassment like this. Anti-harassment might also have a role to play if somebody wants to make a complaint about Google's influence. Can somebody who attended the summit at Google's expense be part of that discussion? Generalizing the problem, I suggest that anti-harassment may need to keep track of conflicts of interest, e.g. anybody involved in any other team that experienced a complaint or a dispute probably shouldn't join anti-harassment for some period, maybe 12 months or more, after the complaint was closed. Without such protections, it may appear that certain people are immune, being favoured or that they get access to restricted information about people they work alongside in another team. I'm not alleging this is the case with Molly but that is the perception that would arise in any situation like this. Regards, Daniel -- Debian Developer https://danielpocock.com
