Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

I haven't said anything against this. The announcement that the apps were removed and why is informing the community.

If the developer decides to come public and want an appeal from the community so be it.. or if someone truly cares enough they'll open a thread in appeal for the dev themselves.

The default action should not be to call someone out on a public forum. Only if an agreed resolution cannot be determined should it get to something like this.

We delegate that authority to make decisions for us to people we trust and we need to let them do their jobs.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

The punishment should never occur behind closed doors.

The initial approach, in some cases, should IMO.

EDIT:

open != mob rule

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

I'm confused here. Can you give me an example? How can the Extras mods initiate something behind closed doors and then come here for punishment without it resulting in mobs?

So if there's an App in Extras that bricks devices.. it should be left until the community can come to a consensus for fear of implementing punishment prior to properly giving people a vote? (sorry for the extreme, I'm just confused what you seem to be considering punishment.)

(or do you just mean the punishment announced?)

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

I think even if the initial approach could take place quietly I'm not sure why the announcement of the reason for removing the apps would be significantly less likely to upset people than the initial announcement in this thread.

If you're completely honest with people about who did what, and people don't like what was done, they're still going to be pissed off. I'm not sure you avoid the anger, or just delay it. Indeed, you could even make it worse if the announcement is at all delayed and people feel like they've been kept in the dark about a serious problem.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

your last question answers itself. ;)

I see resolution = punishment here.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

Ok.. thanked both posts for agreement. Just had a slight synapse failure for a second.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

*sigh*

- approach silently
- announce process start publicly
- announce resolution publicly
- put away torches and pitchforks and move on

EDIT: so many unsafe assumptions being made about points presented here... can we just stop that?

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

But how long will we wait for the resolution? If a program is found that bricks devices, an announcement should be made immediately (and probably stickied), with a resolution added later.

I'm not as concerned with the resolution as I am passing along pertinent information in a timely manner.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

The announcement should come pretty much immediately.. that's why I was generic in mine. It allows the "punishment" to be announced while still allotting the Mods/Admins to PM and discuss it with the dev.

If it turns out the dev was malicious, a modified announcement could be made that he/she's been banned permanently.

As far as the mob thing... once it's done it's done.. especially if the thread is locked. Unless someone really cares that much they won't bother making a new post just to scream because their favorite app is gone I don't think that'll be all that common.

Then again.. I'm sure we'll see the "WTF admins tramplin mah rights!" cropping up. But any time you have jobs/positions in any form you'll get those.

If we have a post/sticky/wiki/document that explains explicitly what happens when/if a Dev (or anybody) breaks or abuses the extras repo's.. there isn't much to argue about. The announcement contains a link directly to whatever portion of that guidance is applicable. That way it's not just a bunch of people screaming "BURN HIM", "NOOO WE LOVE HIM".. etc.

Re: SIO2 Interactive spamming votes to get his/her applications to Extras
 

In that case, what is the channel to be used by a person who notices this kind of abuse? Is leaving a comment at maemo.org > packages > Fremantle Extras-testing free armel enough. There seems to be comment threads there with no activity within the last few months.

It seems like OP joined here relatively recently, as have I. At least my initial response would have been similar: I would have posted about it on this forum. maemo.wiki's front page or FAQ doesn't have answer on how to handle situation like this. Quickly searching the maemo.org site doesn't reveal any help on how to deal situation like this.

It's one thing to say this should be approached silently, and other thing to clearly provide information to end users how the silent approach should be handled.