GOVERNANCE.md: Do we need a process to appoint moderators for services other than the forum?

[miri64]

Currently the GOVERNANCE.md only describes the process to appoint forum moderators since they have special technical moderation powers (editing posts, splitting out discussions into separate topics, blocking users, filtering spam, …). Should we also have also a process for the following services? Should these moderation role also be expanded to the more social responsibilities of moderators?

• Matrix: Here the moderation powers only go as far as blocking/kicking out users
• Mailing lists: Here the moderation powers only go as far as filtering spam

Useful links

• https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/blob/master/GOVERNANCE.md#moderators
• https://forum.riot-os.org/t/moving-from-community-processes-to-governance-md/4433/2
• https://forum.riot-os.org/t/moving-from-community-processes-to-governance-md/4433/9#p-16566-comment-11-2
• GOVERNANCE.md: remove “Community Processes” in favor of “GOVERNANCE.md” #21067 (comment)

[chrysn]

I don't think we need any added process there – there are lots of things that happen in the project that are not "merging a PR" that happen (changing GitHub settings, changing moderators, creating repos, hosting something on tattooine, creating a social media account somewhere) for which I'd rather not have an individual policy.

My impression of how we do all these things today is "when two maintainers agree that it is good and that it doesn't need a broader consensus, they do it" – but I'd not write this down individually, but only as a general policy. That creates the issue of distinguishing this from "how do we make statements as a project" (say, if someone suggested that we add to our readme that we support human rights, which I think is a given, but I predict it'd spawn so much discussion that it doesn't happen). But I trust that if we want to put this down, we'd find a phrasing that draws an arbitrary fuzzy line between everyday chores and making public statements on behalf of the project.

[maribu]

I think documenting the process has value. If that just is: "Maintainers decide whom to grant the following roles: Forum moderator, ..." that is little effort to write down. People seeking to gain that role then would know where to knock and ask.

How were those roles handed out so far? Let's just write that down with a sentence or two.

[miri64]

If that just is: "Maintainers decide whom to grant the following roles: Forum moderator, ..." that is little effort to write down.

That's picking the worst example. Especially forum moderators (for which we already have a process described) should be granted by the community at large, not just the maintainers.

[miri64]

How were those roles handed out so far?

See #21067 (comment). Also added that comment to the Useful links section above.