| 23 Jun 2024 |
 Ami | this isn't a case of the "it's unfair, bans should be objective" kind of thing, i haven't followed the matrix.org coc list closely enough to provide a detailed comment on it, but i'm getting the impression that some of the ban reasons on there are questionable | 13:45:26 |
 Emma [it/its] | ^ what i was saying | 13:46:07 |
| Emma [it/its] | m.org-coc has a bit of a history of being "i dont like this person, so im going to ban them for coc violations" | 13:46:39 |
| Emma [it/its] | In reply to @Valodim:stratum0.org
Not like there is such a thing as objective criteria for bans though there is, though | 13:48:31 |
| Emma [it/its] | #community-moderation-effort-bl:neko.dev is an example of a list where subjective bans just simply arent allowed and will get you removed | 13:49:12 |
| Ami | (also, emma, probably a good idea to explicitly state if this affects your stance on the related ban that was made) | 13:51:18 |
| Emma [it/its] | huh? | 13:52:11 |
| Emma [it/its] | no none of this relates to the specific ban in question, im just commenting on the usage of the morg coc list in itself | 13:52:37 |
| Emma [it/its] | Ami im not sure if you remember solonovamax or whatever it was? | 14:08:08 |
| Emma [it/its] | yeah @solonovamax:matrix.org, they were on the m.org coc list for a few weeks wrongly | 14:09:06 |
| Ami | i do | 14:10:15 |
|  Jona set a profile picture. | 21:40:17 |
| 24 Jun 2024 |
|  @dclmatrix:matrix.org removed their profile picture. | 05:28:20 |
| @dclmatrix:matrix.org removed their display name blu3. | 05:28:27 |
| @dclmatrix:matrix.org left the room. | 05:28:31 |
|  deniel22 joined the room. | 12:41:50 |
| 25 Jun 2024 |
|  @patka_123:matrix.org changed their display name from patka to patka (new account: @patka:envs.net). | 08:42:09 |
| @patka_123:matrix.org left the room. | 08:58:30 |
|  NixOS Moderation Bot banned  @rgbcube:rgbcu.be (<no reason supplied>). | 09:32:30 |
|  Apurba Sundar Nayak joined the room. | 13:26:33 |
| 26 Jun 2024 |
|  @vigress9:matrix.org joined the room. | 05:51:46 |
| 28 Jun 2024 |
|  sophie joined the room. | 15:42:04 |
| 29 Jun 2024 |
|  @theophane:hufschmitt.net left the room. | 06:12:28 |
 jakegrin | Will new members step up?
https://www.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1dqn9os/4_out_of_5_nixos_board_members_have_quit/ | 12:01:52 |
 proofconstruction | That will be for the assembly to determine, surely | 13:03:51 |
 K900 | I don't think the assembly is in charge of that, technically. | 13:05:19 |
| jakegrin | Why not promote the board observers? | 14:16:25 |
| K900 | That's a question for the people who are currently legally on the board | 14:17:05 |
| proofconstruction | The original announcement “giving power to the community” stated that the board would delegate its power to institutions created by the assembly, but these have not been specified yet. When this is complete, this delegation could be done either by the board simply agreeing to abide by the determinations of the assembly/its structural outputs or by formally amending the articles of the foundation to assign various powers to the assembly/other bodies (possibly also relieving the board of the same powers). It would also be possible to amend the articles to make it legally possible for the assembly/others to choose board members in the future, though the assembly was not intended to persist beyond the creation of the new governance structures and the vesting of powers to these. There must still be a human assigned to the board in any case, which supposedly is just Ron now, but it also seems unlikely that the others have completed the relevant paperwork to formally leave their board seats. Probably everything is still in limbo. Either way, the assembly has de-facto supreme power at this point, and whoever is still legally on the board will surely respect its decisions whether or not the articles have been amended by then. Anything else surely leads to ruin. | 15:24:26 |
