W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > September 2010

[Bug 10524] Please clarify procedure and recourse for non-working group members when they are unsatisfied with a bug resolution

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 14:18:16 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Ov9rM-0006sw-9h@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10524





--- Comment #6 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>  2010-09-13 14:18:14 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > 
> > > In the policy or boiler plate bug message it might be good to let non-working
> > > group members know that they MUST join the group to affect change if they can't
> > > get someone  who is a member to write a change proposal on their behalf. Many
> > > people outside of the group won't be aware of the fact that they have to join.
> > 
> > Maybe this isn't the case? Maybe non-members don't have to join?
> > 
> > One related post on the comment list [1] seems to indicate that non-members
> > writing change proposals isn't encouraged. But another post to the comment list
> > [2] seems to indicate that non-members writing change proposals is okay
> > according to the policy. 
> > 
> > It would be good clarify in the policy non-member procedure if it differs from
> > members. Many people may not want to join the group but will want to
> > pursue/escalate an issue.
> 
> I agree this needs to be clarified.
> 
> My perspective is that what is stated in the Decision Policy is a few necessary
> conditions, but meeting those alone are not sufficient.  There are many reasons
> why a Change Proposal is not accepted, and IP considerations are but one of
> them.
> 
> Regarding the email that you quoted, I am in an active, private discussion with
> Shelley, and will not comment further until that is resolved.
> 
> - Sam Ruby
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ListGuidelines

Procedures governing this group should be arrived at publicly, and applied
consistently. 

If the section pointed out is not sufficient, it needs to be amended until
sufficient. Or it needs to be removed, and a condition of membership formally
defined. 

You can't change the rules, saying they're acceptable for one person, but not
another. Such inconsistency causes confusion, and gives an appearance of bias.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 13 September 2010 14:18:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:24 UTC