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

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10524





--- Comment #7 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>  2010-09-13 16:18:36 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> 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.

Bias such as the following

http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100913#l-689

Where all I have to do is comment on a bug and the W3C team rep decides to
change the rules of what gets posted to HTML-WG. 

This following the W3C team rep changing the rules of HTML WG team membership. 

This following the W3C team rep changing the rules about who could post to the
HTML WG, following my postings to this email.

Do we see a trend here? 

Rules that are changed based on bias, that single out individuals aren't rules
-- their barriers to participation.

-- 
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 16:18:39 UTC