> On Apr 14, 2021, at 5:38 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:49 PM Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>
>> This is why I asked the question "who decides?" Given a disagreement in
>> which the proposed remedy is to ostracise a participant, it is necessary to
>> inquire for what reason this should be done (and, perhaps, who is pushing
>> for it to be done). My suggestion is that this judgment can be made by the
>> community (via secret ballot), unless it is decided to delegate that power
>> to a smaller body, considered as trustees, or whatever you choose to call
>> them.
>
> Personally, I think that voting is unworkable in practice. I think
> decisions can be reasonably delegated to a small group of trusted
> people. A fairly common name for that group is "moderators". It
> might be appropriate to use voting of some sort when selecting
> moderators.
Yes, that seems reasonable. I think the NetBSD project is an example of this,
where the membership votes for the trustees, and the trustees are responsible
for a number of project aspects including correcting bad behavior such as we're
discussing here.
The SC was mentioned earlier in this thread, though that's not quite so natural
given how that is appointed.
paul
