Activity

1. bmuenzenmeyer

   assigned

   mcollina

   ,

   ovflowd

   and

   ruyadorno

   on Sep 5, 2026
2. bmuenzenmeyer

   added

   Collaborator Summit

   Session ProposalA session proposal for the Collaboration SummitA session proposal for the Collaboration Summit

   on Sep 5, 2026
3. bmuenzenmeyer commented on Sep 30, 2026

   

   bmuenzenmeyer

   on Sep 30, 2026

   Last edited by bmuenzenmeyer

   Author

   More actions

   Moderation Roundtable: 60 min

   Time	Item	TL;DR
   9:30 – 9:35	Intro	Norms, pick a timekeeper
   9:35 – 9:47	#1092 Reduce moderator permissions	In the interests of security, drop org-owner from moderators; keep the Org Moderator role; escalate rare removals to designated owners
   9:47 – 9:57	#1093 Moderation SLAs	Response times for reports, issues, tags (24–48h) and onboarding (45 days max)
   9:57 – 10:05	#1094 Moderation team chair	Yearly chair who keeps SLAs, reports and recertification moving; no veto, no extra permissions
   10:05 – 10:17	#1096 Incident response lifecycle	7-step process for bigger CoC reports, plus conflict-of-interest and no-retaliation rules
   10:17 – 10:25	#1097 Contributor Covenant 3.0	Upgrade the CoC to v3; review the notable new clauses
   10:25 – 10:30	Wrap-up	Owner and next step per item

   If an item runs over, cut from #1097 first, since it can continue on the PR.
4. benjamingr commented on Oct 1, 2026

   

   benjamingr

   on Oct 1, 2026

   Last edited by benjamingr

   More actions

   Just async comments:

   In the interests of security, drop org-owner from moderators; keep the Org Moderator role; escalate rare removals to designated owners

   Honestly I don't think we need this (wouldn't impact me with my org-owner role anyway - but still) - in practice we've tried this several times in the past and had no significant abuse due to moderators having org owner in ~10 years of the moderation team existing. As far as I remember only thing close is refack in ~2018 which was a very different story (and one or two small mistakes that were corrected/fixed).

   In any case I think moderator permissions is a question for the TSC and not the moderation team - it's really important to me the moderation team is able to act quickly and moderators are trusted in their role to manage incidents in a pinch. Moderator actions are fully auditable through the audit log.

   I'm fine if there is a JIT access flow (moderator pings a slack bot to get admin permissions temporarily) but I would want to not block this on other people being available.

   In practice - GitHub admin permissions aren't super scary and don't gate the actual scary stuff (the release ci which is separate, hackerone/incidents if that ever works again, release keys etc).

   Response times for reports, issues, tags (24–48h) and onboarding (45 days max)

   I agree ideally we'd have more help but to be fair moderation has been much more quiet in the last 3-4 years (yay!) with weeks without incidents at a time (which is a good thing but also a reduction in "hype").

   We're all volunteers why would we want to impose SLAs? We tried PagerDuty before (2017? @hackygolucky maybe remembers) I don't recall it working particularly well. I'd expect SLAs (and people being on call) would require funding and I doubt the TSC has an appetite for that.

   7-step process for bigger CoC reports, plus conflict-of-interest and no-retaliation rules

   I think the harder interpersonal stuff is hard and tricky enough and any process we impose is going to just complicate things. The current escalation paths make sense to me. What's missing with OpenJS CoC is arguably an explicit allowance to share information between CoC teams (or a process other than asking the TSC through a moderation team tsc member).

   As for relationships - I think the process (people self recusing) work well enough and moderators should be trusted to a high standard to do so. Moderation is about dealing with conflicts and the tricky parts in an empathic way and trying to de-escalate and create a collaborative environment.

   Retaliation against someone who reports a CoC concern in good faith or provides information during an investigation is itself a CoC violation.

   SGTM though this needs a TSC vote (and probably/maybe CPC board approval?)