Policy tweak

[refack]

I suggest eliminating the mod-team emeriti status, as it seems unnecessary, and it hasn't been used anyway.

[jasnell]

I'm generally -1 on this. We've been working generally towards encouraging the use of emeritus status as a way of letting folks know that it's ok to step back as necessary.

[refack]

I that case we have another reason to revert #187

[benjamingr]

@refack would you like me to revert #187 and defer to another team member while we settle this? I had no intention making you feel uncomfortable and I want to make sure we resolve this in a way that does not make you feel uncomfortable.

As I said before, I really appreciate the work you put into the project and would like to help you be comfortable with the process around this.

I did not remember we had an emeritus status clause there (this is my mistake and I apologise). In fact I recall the moderation team discussing this issue and deciding against moderation team emeritus status in general. I will bring this issue as well as the discussion internally - thanks for bringing it up.

[othiym23]

LGTM.

As a member of the moderation team, I'd like to point out that the moderation team is not a Node.js Foundation Working Group (which is why I'm pedantic about consistently referring to it as "the moderation team"). It has some significant differences in terms of working processes and responsibilities from working groups, and I think it's a good idea to keep the list of people involved with the team limited to the current members of the team (for instance, if people are reaching out to the moderation team about ongoing harassment, we want it to be crystal clear that the people in the readme are empowered to immediately handle things).

[gibfahn]

It is my understanding (as a moderation team member) that the moderation team reached consensus on not having emeritus status for moderation team members, so this change seems reasonable in accordance with that.

I'm generally -1 on this. We've been working generally towards encouraging the use of emeritus status as a way of letting folks know that it's ok to step back as necessary.

@jasnell @Tiriel does the fact that the moderation team think that emeritus in general seems like a good idea, but don't think it should apply for this team, change your opinion on this?

[Tiriel]

@gibfahn Partially, my initial concerns aren't really resolved, but I do respect the mod team's choice, so I'm going to dismiss my review without approving.

To be clear, I understand the decision of the mod team, but I think having an emeritus status is important, event if it's not used, at least to send the message that stepping down is ok (both to the team member and to the people outside the team).

See #188 (comment)

[jasnell]

I still generally prefer emeritus status to stay and I believe @refack should be listed with that status.

[Trott]

I'm opposed to Emeritus status here for both philosophical reasons and practical reasons.

Philisophical: Emeritus is good for things where people feel like they're giving up stature. It's true for Collaborator status. It's true for TSC. It's true for CommComm. I don't feel like that's our culture on Moderation Team. With no disrespect to custodial staff, people on Moderation Team have likened it to being a janitor rather than having a position of leadership.

Practical: People might want to contact a Moderation Team member about a possible CoC violation or other concern. By listing people who are not on the Moderation Team, we increase the likelihood of someone contacting someone who is not on the Moderation Team.

[Trott]

I guess I'll also add that even if we decide that Emeritus status for former Moderation Team folks makes sense, it does not need to be in the policy and should be removed on those grounds. This is an example of one of the many, many policy requirements we have that people aren't aware of and don't follow. These things should be removed.

[benjamingr]

With no disrespect to custodial staff, people on Moderation Team have likened it to be a janitor rather than a position of leadership.

❤️ This a thousand times!

The moderation team cleans up and helps mediate and solve communication issues. It should remain as objective as possible and as a team it should be the farthest thing away from leadership which needs to make controversial calls.

[bnb]

You make a convincing argument @Trott. Approved 👍

[benjamingr]

This appears to need TSC/CC approval to land as it's a policy change. While the moderation team is in favour we can't approve it on our own if I understand correctly.

Attached TSC and CC agenda labels so this gets OKd in those meetings.

[Trott]

Attached TSC and CC agenda labels so this gets OKd in those meetings.

I appreciate the caution. I'd definitely rather have people err on that side. But this can land IMO.

The README for this repo says:

Members of the TSC and CommComm shall operate under Lazy Consensus as a collaborative unit in the Admin repo

I think we've achieved lazy consensus:

• This has been open for 72 hours in the admin repo.
• Both teams were requested to review.
• There are no objections.
• There are multiple approvals from each committee.

Landing!

[benjamingr]

@Trott I agree - as I'm neither TSC nor CommComm I wanted to err on the side of caution. I removed the labels - thanks.