Code of Conduct Committee Structure Proposal #442
Labels
No labels
category
budget
category
code-of-conduct
category
docs
category
elections
category
events
category
initiatives
category
mindshare
category
policies
category
spending-request
category
Strategy Summit
category
trademarks
Next Meeting
state
resolved
good first issue
help wanted
needs
changes
needs
reporter feedback
needs
triage
needs
vote
role
engineering
role
fca
role
foa
role
fpl
role
initiative lead
role
mindshare
scope
bug
scope
improvement
scope
new
state
approved
state
blocked
state
duplicate
state
invalid
state
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
8 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
council/tickets#442
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
TLDR;
I am proposing a formalized structure for the Code of Conduct Committee that will require community feedback and a Council vote to be ratified and added to the CoC documentation.
Overview and Context
Hello, Fedora Council! As most of you know, I am continuing work on Fedora's Code of Conduct documentation and resources as part of my new role focused on Code of Conduct outreach and as a continuation of the work I started while I served as FCAIC. I have put together a proposal for a formalized Code of Conduct Committee Structure.
This should be a new page under the Code of Conduct drop down in the Project documentation [0] (like the Clarifying Notes and Statements page). I am developing additional CoC Committee documentation to go with the structure piece(to come in a different ticket later on).
I think it's valuable to get this part out there to start as we need to formalize and socialize bringing new folks onto the Committee and what the work entails. It's also important to bring transparency and formalize my participation, which has been on a transitional basis for the time being.
Note: The structure and commitments have been reviewed and approved by our Legal support as a preliminary step before community feedback and Council vote to make sure we are on the right track and working within our scope. If any major changes are made, it will need to go through that Legal review and approval process again. (happy to walk it through that process, if needed!)
Proposal
Fedora Code of Conduct Committee
Who is the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee?
The Code of Conduct Committee consists of the Fedora Project Leader, the Fedora Community Architect, and Fedora community members. Members of the Code of Conduct Committee will be provided with incident response training and guidelines around Fedora’s Code of Conduct.
Responsibilities of the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee
The Fedora Code of Conduct Committee will:
The current Code of Conduct Committee is comprised of:
Adding or Removing Members to the Code of Conduct Committee
The Fedora Project Leader and Fedora Community Architect are members of the Code of Conduct Committee, regardless of who holds these roles. Ideally the Committee should have at least three members at all times, and no more than seven. The Fedora Council will be notified of all changes in membership to the Fedora Conduct Committee. Adding and removing members to the Committee will happen from time to time for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to:
Adding a Member to the Code of Conduct Committee
To add a member to the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee:
Removing a Member from the Code of Conduct Committee
The process to remove a member of the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee is:
Notice from
Fedora Code of Conduct Committee Commitments
Members of the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee involved in investigating reports and making recommendations for resolution of Code of Conduct violations are required to uphold the following principles, ensuring that bias, lack of confidentiality and conflicts of interest do not impact the outcome of a Code of Conduct determination.
I agree to adhere to the Fedora Code of Conduct, in both letter and spirit, and acknowledge that violating the Code could result in removal from the Committee.
I agree to keep the process, any facts I learn, and any evidence I review confidential, and agree to discuss them only with individuals who are part of the process. (e.g. Fedora Code of Conduct Committee members, Red Hat Legal, or other designated individuals.)
I will recuse myself if I cannot be fair and impartial in an individual case, due to my personal involvement with the parties involved. (If I have questions about recusal, I will consult the Fedora Community Architect and/or the Fedora Project Leader.)
I agree that I will review Code of Conduct reports, conduct investigations, and make recommendations fairly and impartially.
I will review the reports and deliberate only in confidential sessions, with the outcome to be shared only with the parties and others as determined on a need-to-know basis. (e.g. system administrators, moderators, or project leads.)
I will respect the process and outcome, recognizing that the Committee decision is the product of the Code of Conduct Committee, even if I do not personally agree, my recommendations are rejected, or I am part of the minority.
Please respond with acknowledgement that you have reviewed these commitments and agree to follow them in your role as a member of the Fedora Code of Conduct Committee.
Links
[0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
I've created a topic on Fedora Discussion for this ticket.
Please keep this ticket focused. Discuss there, and record votes and decisions here. Thanks!
Community Blog post published. Voting will begin in two weeks.
The community comment period has passed. Council members, please vote by 29 Wednesday.
Metadata Update from @bcotton:
My comment "My only substantive comment is that I don’t see a mechanism for involuntary removal" in the Discussion stands, but I can live with this as-is and we can address that later, if necessary.
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
Metadata Update from @bcotton:
This is approved.
Metadata Update from @mattdm:
+1