[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 #18 from Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>  2010-09-13 19:12:53 ---
(In reply to comment #13)

Hi Sam,

> > * What is the proper procedure for non-members to follow if they are
> > unsatisfied with a bug resolution?
> 
> I said early in this thread that hard cases make for bad laws.  The procedure
> will depend on what reason is given for the person to remain a non-member.

I think I understand...Perhaps adding something like along the lines of the
following in policy could work?

"Non-members are encouraged to join the working group so they can fully
participate in this process. But extenuating circumstances for not joining the
group will be considered by the Chairs on a case-by-case basis."

Then link to the info on how to join the group for the phrase "join the working
group" and have an email link to the chairs for the phrase "considered by the
Chairs".

This will:

1. Encourage people to join and let them know how to join (nowhere in the
policy does it say how to join).
2. Let non-members know if they have extenuating circumstances, the Chairs will
listen and the non-member won't be dismissed out of hand. A short and simple
statement something like the one above could uncover legitimate reasoning.

> The reason why the Discussion Guidelines are not ancillary to this bug is very
> simple: if the reason given turns out to be an unwillingness to agree to these
> guidelines, then the answer is very simple: there is no procedure for such
> individuals (if any) to follow as they simply are not welcome here.

Maybe have a link to the Discussion Guidelines in the info on how to join? Then
all new members will be made aware of the Guidelines and repercussions of not
following them.

Laura

-- 
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 19:12:56 UTC