Subject: RE: public? Re: Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:06:55 -0800

Zak Greant wrote:
> It is primarily an administrative, ombuds and service role - rather
> than making policy, editors focus on helping good and representative
> policy to be made.

Given this definition of the role, I withdraw my agreement to serve. I do
not have time to perform an administrative function that OSI cannot fund
directly by its Board doing necessary fundraising.

> In their role as editors, editors do not raise issues or give input on
> the issues. If an editor has an issue to raise or input to give as an
> individual, then they may not act as an editor for the relevant issue.

Particularly if an editor does not actually provide input on issues, then
the experts you have already recruited seem ill-suited for this more limited
editorial role. I now vote -1 to all of them, considering that we will waste
their talents in this way. I'd much rather they stay on license-discuss and,
like John Cowan and me, comment on the issues whenever they can. 

/Larry


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zak Greant [mailto:zak.greant@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 12:45 PM
> To: Ernest Prabhakar
> Cc: License Discuss
> Subject: Re: public? Re: Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List
> 
> Hi Ernie, Greetings All,
> 
> On 11/27/07, Ernest Prabhakar <ernest.prabhakar@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> > Zak, could you perhaps start a wiki page for editor responsibilities,
> > so we can start writing these down?
> 
> Rough notes at:
>   https://osi.osuosl.org/wiki/handbook/editor
> 
> ... the text of which follows:
> 
> = The OSI Editor's Handbook =
> 
> == Role ==
> 
> The OSI editor role exists to help ensure that public input on OSI
> issues is collected, acknowledged, addressed and archived.
> 
> It is primarily an administrative, ombuds and service role - rather
> than making policy, editors focus on helping good and representative
> policy to be made.
> 
> Another key focus of the role is helping involved parties follow the
> correct processes and ensuring that community concerns are addressed.
> 
> In their role as editors, editors do not raise issues or give input on
> the issues. If an editor has an issue to raise or input to give as an
> individual, then they may not act as an editor for the relevant issue.
> 
> == Goals ==
> 
> Editors seek to make the discussion on OSI issues accessible and
> transparent.
> 
> == Conduct ==
> 
> When acting in the role of editor, editors will be civil, concise and
> impartial.
> 
> Editors who cannot follow these guidelines will be relieved from their
> duties.
> 
> 
> == Duties ==
> 
> Editors have three major duties:
>  * triaging issues
>  * maintaining the archives (which include things like the FAQ,
> opinions on licenses, etc.)
>  * shepherding the public OSI processes
> 
> == The OSI Editor's Mailing List ==
> 
> There will be a mailing list for the OSI editors. Posting to this list
> will be restricted to members, but subscription and the list archives
> will be public.
> 
> The list is where editors will discuss issues such as maintaining the
> tools that they use, how to best use the tools, task distribution and
> so on. All other substantive issues, ranging from discussions on
> changing the editors role and nominations for new editors to new FAQ
> entries and issues to ticket, should happen on the public discussion
> lists.
> 
> For example, if someone believes that there should be a new FAQ entry,
> the request for this should not be posted to the editor's list or be
> sent directly to an individual editor.  Instead, the request should go
> to the list where the people most interested in the topic are
> subscribed. The editors will notice the issue and triage it.
> 
> If this process is not followed, the editors will move from their
> desired role as administrators and facilitators to the undesired role
> of gatekeeper and governor.
> 
> 
> --
> Cheers!
> --zak