Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Keeping RO discussions in the public repo #32

Closed
ssube opened this issue Mar 8, 2016 · 8 comments
Closed

Keeping RO discussions in the public repo #32

ssube opened this issue Mar 8, 2016 · 8 comments

Comments

@ssube
Copy link

ssube commented Mar 8, 2016

I see being an RO as a very limited sort of public servant, so I think we should keep all discussions related to electing, impeaching, and debates between ROs in the public repo.

It's important that both existing ROs and other users be able to support or voice concerns about an RO, especially when we're discussing adding or removing someone.

This is not about trolls in general (I agree with @MadaraUchiha there, the potential for abuse is a problem), just votes and group discussions related to RO status.

Thoughts?

@AmaanC
Copy link
Member

AmaanC commented Mar 8, 2016

Sounds fair to me.
On 8 Mar 2016 22:41, "Sean Sube" notifications@github.com wrote:

I see being an RO as a very limited sort of public servant, so I think we
should keep all discussions related to electing, impeaching, and debates
between ROs in the public repo.

It's important that both existing ROs and other users be able to support
or voice concerns about an RO, especially when we're discussing adding or
removing someone.

Thoughts?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#32.

@benjamingr
Copy link
Contributor

👍

@Trasiva
Copy link

Trasiva commented Mar 8, 2016

I think that's exactly how it should be. ROs are responsible for the QOL within the chat, and therefore transparency is a must.

@ssube
Copy link
Author

ssube commented Mar 8, 2016

Also, this is largely a duplicate of #29, but I hope we can codify how that applies to RO status.

@loktar00
Copy link

loktar00 commented Mar 8, 2016

👍 * 💯
(just wanted to use the 100 icon)

@Zirak
Copy link

Zirak commented Mar 8, 2016

I originally made that issue in a private room because the implications of it being in the open worried me a bit. Let's say that you the were the subject of the discussion of keeping you an RO, it spanned several personal topics and at the end you stay an RO then that discussion would potentially be a blemish on your name.

That felt like something I wouldn't have wanted to be done to me so I opened it in a private room to be hashed out, but the final decision should be of course done in a public repo.

@MadaraUchiha
Copy link
Contributor

+1.

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 8:34 PM Canop notifications@github.com wrote:

This is a valid point. We should be able to say that we don't think X is
able to be a RO without risking embarrassing him elsewhere (job, friends,
presidential race, etc.)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#32 (comment)
.

@loktar00
Copy link

Closing, consensus sounds like we discuss any RO actions, happenings in the public eye.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants