Part of the moderation policy review framed by openjs-foundation/summit#511, for discussion at the Moderation Roundtable on October 1 (if not resolves to consensus prior).
Shared responsibility has meant no one is responsible
The moderation team operates as equal peers. No one is designated to keep things moving. The results are visible:
Propose a chair whose job is to expedite
The chair coordinates the team's operational commitments. They do not lead investigations, override decisions, or speak for the team on any case.
The chair expedites:
- Monitors whether SLAs are being met and follows up when they are not
- Ensures the monthly TSC report is produced (this may require separate tooling investment)
- Initiates the annual recertification process in coordination with the TSC
- Drives the onboarding checklist when a new member is approved, unless designated to another member
- Serves as default point of contact for the TSC, CPC, and OpenJS Foundation on moderation logistics
The chair does not:
Prior art
The Python PSF Code of Conduct Working Group designates chairs whose responsibilities include leading recertification, facilitating meetings, and ensuring the group delivers on its obligations to the PSF Board. Chairs are operational facilitators, not decision-makers.
The CNCF CoC Committee relies on Linux Foundation staff for operational coordination. We do not have equivalent staff support, which makes a volunteer chair role more necessary.
Election and term
The chair is elected yearly, tied to the annual recertification cycle:
- Recertification completes first. The team knows who opted in and was recertified.
- Any recertified member may self-nominate or nominate another (with consent). Nominations collected within 7 days.
- Consensus-seeking votes. Concerns escalated to the TSC.
- One-year term, starting at recertification, ending at the next.
If the chair does not recertify, the role is vacated automatically.
Vacancy
In the event of a vacancy, the team operates as peers, as we currently do, and report this gap to the TSC.
Open questions
- Is this role necessary, or can the team coordinate effectively without it? History would suggest the role is needed.
Action items
Shared responsibility has meant no one is responsible
The moderation team operates as equal peers. No one is designated to keep things moving. The results are visible:
Propose a chair whose job is to expedite
The chair coordinates the team's operational commitments. They do not lead investigations, override decisions, or speak for the team on any case.
The chair expedites:
The chair does not:
Prior art
The Python PSF Code of Conduct Working Group designates chairs whose responsibilities include leading recertification, facilitating meetings, and ensuring the group delivers on its obligations to the PSF Board. Chairs are operational facilitators, not decision-makers.
The CNCF CoC Committee relies on Linux Foundation staff for operational coordination. We do not have equivalent staff support, which makes a volunteer chair role more necessary.
Election and term
The chair is elected yearly, tied to the annual recertification cycle:
If the chair does not recertify, the role is vacated automatically.
Vacancy
In the event of a vacancy, the team operates as peers, as we currently do, and report this gap to the TSC.
Open questions
Action items