| 4 Nov 2021 |
 problems | the community team is intended to be part of and responsible to the community, specifically to avoid having a team that makes decisions unilaterally and is unaccountable to the community | 23:41:28 |
 tomberek | I'll be blunt. I don't think many people have a problem with the intent to create a team, or that they should be held accountable and have some sort of oversight; there is broad agreement about that narrow point. The problem is all the additional baggage that came with it. Then the disagreement about the baggage turned into questioning and debating every piece of it. | 23:57:50 |
| 5 Nov 2021 |
 Irenes | I mean, I get it, we're trying to do something a bit innovative, based on our experience with this stuff | 01:09:56 |
| Irenes | especially with the focus on leadership development as part of it | 01:10:10 |
| Irenes | I understand why that's surprising to people | 01:10:23 |
| Irenes | we've seen the ways these things can go badly elsewhere, and are trying to do better | 01:11:12 |
| tomberek | One second. Can you identify what you think I meant by "baggage"? | 01:11:17 |
| Irenes | not specifically, no, I can think of a lot of things but I don't want to put words in your mouth | 01:11:33 |
| Irenes | feel free to elaborate | 01:11:39 |
| tomberek | I would like you to try. I'm not trying to catch a mistake or accuse of putting words in my mouth. I want to understand your point of view of the overall situation. | 01:14:51 |
| Irenes | I will try, but I have to tell you, I don't really feel as if I know a lot about you as a person | 01:18:23 |
| Irenes | and that means anything I say is a wild guess | 01:18:30 |
| Irenes | because there are a lot of things that people coming from various perspectives would object to | 01:18:43 |
| tomberek | It's not the objection I'm asking you to identify. | 01:19:04 |
| Irenes | sorry, uh | 01:19:13 |
| Irenes | okay, but this is already why I am already well aware that I cannot read your mind in the way you're asking me to | 01:19:34 |
| Irenes | because to me "baggage" suggest an objection | 01:19:40 |
| Irenes | *suggests | 01:19:44 |
| Irenes | but people are very different and the easiest way for me to know what you mean is for you to tell me | 01:19:57 |
| tomberek | I'm not asking if you can make an opposing argument. But to identify what you think people would think is the "baggage". (it has a negative connotation, sure) | 01:20:12 |
| Irenes | if the goal is to test my understanding of you, I fail | 01:20:15 |
| Irenes | and I know that and acknowledge it | 01:20:21 |
| Irenes | okay. the statement of values? the description of team procedures? the mentions of bigotry and fascism? the hundreds of comments people left on the GitHub thread? | 01:21:03 |
| Irenes | I mean I'm listing off every section of the document, because I guarantee you there is somebody who objects to any given section | 01:21:31 |
| tomberek | Okay, let's pick one and elaborate. Statement of values is a good place to start. For that subsection, what do you think there is general agreement on, and what is contentious? | 01:24:31 |
| Irenes | I've seen disagreement on whether the section should exist | 01:32:21 |
| Irenes | and on whether it should have novel wording vs. just being the Contributor Covenant or something | 01:32:32 |
| Irenes | and on whether the wording should actually say anything or be vacuous | 01:32:49 |
| Irenes | I do personally believe, although it's hard to be sure, that most people who read it liked it | 01:33:21 |
| Irenes | and didn't comment because there was nothing to change | 01:33:30 |
