[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-project
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-project] Groups under the Council or Foundation: the structure & processes thereof
From:       Rich Freeman <rich0 () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2016-11-14 0:10:52
Message-ID: CAGfcS_=wuBMTRuHhBzSeG5XwswhtTYtYnfhAyKZO0wYUPmkkOw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 2:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, November 13, 2016 11:26:29 AM EST Alec Warner wrote:
>>
>> What I think is actually true is that there are some risks the current
>> board sees, and they (we?, I am on the board after all) see one way to
>> reduce the risk is by this joining. I think we should also be open to
>> evaluating the risks and seeking other avenues to mitigate them.
>>
>> I think, speaking in general terms, one risk is the following.
>>
>> 1) When a community member feels harmed by the community, they can file a
>> suit. They can sue individuals, or they can sue the Foundation. They cannot
>> sue "Comrel" for example, because Comrel is not an entity. They can sue the
>> individuals that compose comrel, or they can sue the Foundation.
>>
>> 2) If they sue the Foundation, we are worried that a 100% hands-off
>> solution is going to be an effective defense. In the current scheme, the
>> Foundation has no real control over the operation of Comrel. I think there
>> is a lack of confidence that this defense is sufficient to dismiss a suit
>> though.

First, I agree with Alec and do think that it is important that our
processes be legally defensible.  I don't think the Trustees can be
left completely in the dark about what is going on.  There are a lot
of ways that can be accomplished, but I don't support 100% hands-off.

>
> A defamation suit is not out of the question if someone feels actions taken
> against them have caused great harm to their reputation.
>
> For example;
> In my case being painted as an outcast could have implications in obtaining
> jobs, etc. It would be interesting to see how a court would rule on someones
> volunteer actions, perceived conduct by others, having effect on their ability
> to make  a living, Based on how others have made them out to be, an outcast,
> etc, tarnishing their reputation publicly.
>
> Something many seem to ignore or overlook. Comrel or any action taken against
> someone could have serious impacts on that individuals career. Their ability
> to make a living, obtain jobs, contracts, etc.

And this is part of why I don't think Comrel actions should be
announced publicly, or when people do have a need to know the amount
of information given is minimal.  Somebody has left Gentoo is probably
all they truly need to know, and if the person who has left wants to
divulge more they can do so, but Gentoo should be off the hook in that
case.

So, in the hypothetical case of somebody who announces to the world on
a public list that they're an outcast, and the distro doesn't speak
specifically to that persons case but only discusses general policy,
then there really isn't much to complain about.  If the person was
concerned about their reputation, then they shouldn't have announced
to the world that they're an outcast.

If Gentoo is broadcasting stuff like that to the world then sure there
is potentially risk, depending on the accuracy of what is being said,
and a bunch of other things as well most likely.  Better to just stay
clear of that.

Certainly at my workplace when people are dismissed the company
doesn't comment on why.  People are simply told that somebody is
leaving.  If somebody calls for a reference, the company policy is
that the only thing that gets divulged is their employment dates,
and/or salary, and only if the former employee requests either.

-- 
Rich


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]