Responding to https://github.com/nodejs/board/issues/67

[mhdawson]

Based on the guidance provided in nodejs/board#67 what I recommend is that we do the following:

• Wait for the merger of the CTC/TSC as per #317 and then schedule a vote on suspension.
• If the merger does not occur early next week then schedule a vote on suspension in the existing TSC.

I believe this is the best balance between respecting the urgency involved, while at the same time trying to ensure we have the group which will almost certainly become the TSC involved in the vote.

Please comment with agreement or suggestions for changes.

[mhdawson]

@nodejs/ctc @nodejs/tsc

[jasnell]

This plan SGTM.

[mcollina]

SGTM

[cjihrig]

SGTM too.

[ashleygwilliams]

hi! for those who might not know, i am one of the individual membership directors, and helped draft the board statement this issue responds to. thanks for filing this issue.

a few questions, branching on the two potential situations you listed above:

• what is your best estimate for the date of the vote on suspension?
• how long will the vote be open for?
• when do you anticipate the vote will be closed and results announced?

additionally, in regards to the vote on "suspension", what are the terms of the suspension? and is this understood to be an intermediate step to address the issues of the original vote, or is this understood as a final step to address the issues of the original vote?

[toddself]

I don't see how this course of action resolves he original issue where a bad actor with CoC violations is still part of CTC/TSC. The merge doesn't solve that problem at all; rather it seems to ignore it?

What I am continuing to see here is the tacit (and even overt) approval of a community member acting in contrary to the communty's CoC. Until that member is appropriately dealt with this issue seems pointless?

[mhdawson]

From the board statement:

Accordingly, we urge the TSC to revisit this issue and suspend the individual involved from active TSC participation until this matter is resolved, hopefully with consensus, including support from those who recently resigned, if they would be willing to help.

In this context I understand that the request from the Board is to suspend his involvement in the TSC until a final resolution is reached. To answer some of the questions based on what I was thinking (of course open to discussion):

• suspension means not participating in TSC meetings, votes and business for the period of the suspension
• suspension is an interim step until a final resolution can be achieved
• my personal belief is that it is best if the vote is carried out by the re-merged TSC/CTC. Until we know when/if that will happen its hard to predict specific timing. The goal is not to have it drag out but to have the most appropriate representation when the vote takes place.

[This comment was edited by @Trott for formatting. No textual changes were made.]

[bnoordhuis]

What I am continuing to see here is the tacit (and even overt) approval of a community member acting in contrary to the communty's CoC.

A TSC majority didn't seem to think there was a CoC violation, yet your comment states it as if it were a fact. Who should I believe?

edit: You know what? I already regret getting involved.

[toddself]

@bnoordhuis a majority of the board voted to not remove Rod. The vote was not about whether he violated the CoC, but rather if he should be removed.

It is my understanding that voting to remove someone from the TSC is a very drastic move to make and a vote would only be proposed were there some sort of bona fide claim that the person in question has had multiple complaints made against them. These types of issues don't seem to have come up in the past which means this is likely a very unique and special case.

My comments on CoC violations are entirely my own opinion based on observations about behavior in the past and how I feel that it violates the CoC. As a member of the community, I expect to have to follow the same guidelines as the core contributors. If I feel a core contributor has violated these guidelines, I would expect them to face the same consequences as anyone else, but honestly, even more drastic as they're responsible for public-facing leadership on the project.

It's very hard to lead and up hold rules if the people you are trying to lead feel you're not following those same rules.

[mhdawson]

PR to merge TSC/CTC landed earlier this week.

Next steps based on discussion in first recombined TSC/CTC meeting today:

nodejs/CTC#172

We agreed that initial discussion would best be handled through a medium other than email or voice discussion where it is hard to keep track of and collaborate on options. Nikita will send out a link to a doc to TSC/CTC members with data/initial suggestions. It was discussed that we need to make sure internal discussion does not stretch out too long. This discussion will also factor in the request in nodejs/board#67 within the board repo.

[jasnell]

It does not appear that there is anything further to do here.