Open Stack

I think that offering both would be an excellent solution.  Direct contact to the right people would be best but is not always timely. A generic e-mail is more in terms of 'I would like to talk to someone, call me back' rather than a ticket detailing the case.

Given how crowded the conferences can be, it can be difficult to find the right people to talk to on short notice. The risk is that the lack of availability leads to lack of follow up.

Tim

From: Lauren Sell [mailto:lauren at openstack.org]
Sent: 22 October 2013 00:35
To: Anne Gentle
Cc: Tim Bell; David Mortman; foundation at lists.openstack.org; openstack at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Openstack] Making the Hong Kong Summit as inclusive as possible


On Oct 21, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Anne Gentle <anne at openstack.org<mailto:anne at openstack.org>> wrote:



On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch<mailto:Tim.Bell at cern.ch>> wrote:
Lauren,
Great.... Can the 'Report Harrassment' section have an explicit e-mail address such as reportharassment at opentack.org<mailto:reportharassment at opentack.org>. It would be useful to keep the barrier for reporting problems low as some people may not know how to find a member of the foundation staff.

Hi Tim and everyone on the list -
I was actually one who gave them input that I wouldn't use a generic email address to report anything as serious as harassment, because of wanting to control who knew what about the incident and knowing the person I was reporting to. Hopefully that works well for others.

I'm still reading it all the way through but I think this is just what we needed.

Thanks,
Anne


We could also offer both if that's helpful -- an alias and specific people to contact like there are now.

Best,
Lauren

From: Lauren Sell [mailto:lauren at openstack.org<mailto:lauren at openstack.org>]
Sent: 21 October 2013 20:35
To: David Mortman
Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>; openstack at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Openstack] Making the Hong Kong Summit as inclusive as possible

Hi everyone,

As a quick update, the community code of conduct has now been publicized on the Summit website, wrapped in more event-specific language recommended by this thread and the PyCon code of conduct. There is also a clear process for reporting and responding to any complaints.

http://www.openstack.org/summit/openstack-summit-hong-kong-2013/the-openstack-summit-code-of-conduct/

We're planning to promote the code of conduct in an email blast to all registered attendees this week, make printed copies available at the registration desk on-site and provide a reminder on the back of each badge.  We're also sending it directly to sponsors because there are special notes about booth and party conduct.

Please let us know if you have any additional feedback or ideas.

Thanks!
Lauren

On Oct 3, 2013, at 9:58 AM, Lauren Sell <lauren at openstack.org<mailto:lauren at openstack.org>> wrote:

Hi Anne, David,

Yes, the transparency committee update is on the board meeting agenda, but I think the code of conduct for our Summit is a different issue.

The transparency committee had three main tasks: develop a written policy documenting our approach to transparency, investigate creating an independent ombudsman, and figuring out a way to move non-confidential Board communications to a public mailing list. I circulated the transparency policy on the Foundation mailing list (http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2013-July/001447.html) for comment, and we're hoping to review the policy in today's Board meeting. You can see the latest version here (https://docs.google.com/a/openstack.org/document/d/1sGBtza-mjRXcDzFBSS9aUrYlAtu1se-eerHZN16DPyU/edit).

Regarding the Summit code of conduct, I have an update since my last email about working on reporting/response procedures. We have a draft going here (https://etherpad.openstack.org/reporting-response-procedures) and had a good call with the Ada Initiative last week for input. We're also planning to engage with them to train our event staff before the Summit.  I'd welcome any feedback on the procedures, as well as if there are any other policies we should be looking at (our procedures are based largely on PyCon, also influenced by Ada Initiative) or other organizations we should be engaging with along these lines.

While we won't be able to change the official code of conduct before the Summit, we can wrap it with more specific behavior examples like David had suggested and publicize the reporting/response procedures on our website, in a pre-event email to attendees and on-site.  If there are any issues in the meantime, the Foundation staff, including Jonathan, Stef, Tom and me, are always available and happy to get involved.

As a reminder, I encourage anyone who is interested to dial into the board meeting. The meeting invites are always posted to the Foundation mailing list, and there's a link to register in the agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/3Oct2013BoardMeeting

Thanks,
Lauren

On Oct 1, 2013, at 12:53 PM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:

Thanks Anne!

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Anne Gentle <anne at openstack.org<mailto:anne at openstack.org>> wrote:
Hi David and list and everybody,

The Board meets Oct 3, and Josh has an agenda item for the Transparency WorkGroup. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/3Oct2013BoardMeeting

Anne

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:
So given that it's been nearly two weeks since anyone has responded is it time to rebrand it the Opacity Committee?

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 PM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:
Joshua,
I found this answer hilariously short and opaque especially given the context of it being part of the Transparency Committee. Can you go into more details about what has been discussed in the past as well as what might be proposed at the next board meeting. Speaking of which, when is the next board meeting anyways?

thanks

-David

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Joshua McKenty <joshua at pistoncloud.com<mailto:joshua at pistoncloud.com>> wrote:
David - yes, the ombudsperson office is one of the goals of the Transparency Committee, and we've got an agenda item to dig into again at the next board meeting.

--

Joshua McKenty
Chief Technology Officer
Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
+1 (650) 242-5683<tel:%2B1%20%28650%29%20242-5683>
+1 (650) 283-6846<tel:%2B1%20%28650%29%20283-6846>
http://www.pistoncloud.com<http://www.pistoncloud.com/>

"Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
"Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."

On Sep 15, 2013, at 5:18 PM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:

Joshua,
I'll leave it up to the event staff to determine how they want to handle it in this on-site case. Certainly someone needs to be empowered or the exercise is pointless. For the community as a whole, does the Board of Directors have the authority to create an ombuds office?
-DM

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Joshua McKenty <joshua at pistoncloud.com<mailto:joshua at pistoncloud.com>> wrote:
David, while I think having an onsite group able to field complaints and address incidents is critical, we need to make sure that such a group has the ability to address any complaints. So I'd suggest we pass this directly to the foundation staff, and make sure that the event coordination team is coached appropriately. Having community members act as ombudsperson is both complicated from a legal standpoint, and potentially inappropriate.

Lauren, can you make sure the on-site events team is briefed on the proposed code-of-conduct, and is ready to respond to any complaints that might arise?

--

Joshua McKenty
Chief Technology Officer
Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
+1 (650) 242-5683<tel:%2B1%20%28650%29%20242-5683>
+1 (650) 283-6846<tel:%2B1%20%28650%29%20283-6846>
http://www.pistoncloud.com<http://www.pistoncloud.com/>

"Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
"Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."

On Sep 15, 2013, at 3:59 AM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:26 PM, David Mortman <launchpad at mortman.com<mailto:launchpad at mortman.com>> wrote:
 Agreed. There should be at least a small group, especially for events, so that one person doesn't get hammered but also so there's a committee to make judgement calls etc. Love the idea of some training too.

Given the closeness of the summit (only 2 months away), it's seems like a good idea to put together the initial group of folks who can be the onsite committee to help address any issues that hopefully won't arise. While I'll continue to participate in this effort, unfortunately, I won't be attending the summit myself so I can't help onsite. I will however like  nominate both Anne Gentle and George Reese be initial members of the committee. Anyone else interested? A group of three is probably plenty.
thanks
-David
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack










_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20131022/901aa667/attachment-0001.html>