[Theforum] Re: root access

[Martin]

On Thursday, April 25, 2002, at 06:35  pm, Warden, Matt wrote:

>
> ppk wrote:
>> In my opinion the Admins/Steering Committee/whoever's-on-top *must*
>> have
>> root access (and maybe: must be the *only* body to have root access),
>> even if it doesn't need it for day-to-day workIn my opinion the
>> Admins/Steering Committee/whoever's-on-top *must* have
>> root access (and maybe: must be the *only* body to have root access),
>> even if it doesn't need it for day-to-day work
>
> should the people on the steering committee be the only body with God
> status on weo? I mean, the editing group can edit all they want, but
> those
> with God status can just delete the thing.

Doesn't matter who actually presses the delete button, they would do
it with the authority of the SC. If the editing group stays within its
legitimate
scope of action, the SC has no need or right to act. If it strays from
that (eg
publishing porn, or ads from Ektron), the SC should be able to authorise
a permanent undo on the action, and revoke the rights of an individual
editor (or every member of the editing group if necessary). But the
decision
is separate from the action.

> should the people on the steering committee be the only body which can
> sign checks and receive money?

Nope, but it holds the authority to do so. Decisions on spending the
money
(I'd suggest having the Treasurer on the SC by virtue of his/her position
btw) are devolved down to the groups within appropriate limits.

> Any group can decide whatever they want,
> but if they don't get the money to do it, they ain't gonna do it.

Hence a budgeting process - spend within agreed scope and budget
as your group sees fit to achieve the agreed objectives. If the publicity
group thinks the best way to achieve its objectives is by sending someone
to speak at (say) SXSW on expenses, and that's within budget and
scope, then the SC won't interfere. Of course, it means there may be
nothing
left to spend on any other publicity in that time period, but if the
publicity
group can make the case that they're achieving their objectives, that's
not a problem.

> If all the power is in the steering committee, what are the other groups
> for?
>
> I think the key is cooperation. If you want to put some kind of
> accountability/ass-kicking structure in place, that's fine. But, I think
> the strength of this design is the distribution of responsibility.

Yes, but there's still an upward accountability - subgroups are
accountable for their actions to groups, groups to the SC (and
thereby the other groups), and the SC to the membership.

If a subgroup strays from its legitimate authority, the Monkey
Group would bring it back into line. If an MG strays, the SC
brings it into line. If the SC strays (which it can only do with
the collaboration and participation of the MGs btw), the
membership brings it into line.

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
email: martin at easyweb.co.uk             PGP ID:	0xA835CCCB
	martin at members.evolt.org      snailmail:	30 Shandon Place
   tel:	+44 (0)774 063 9985				Edinburgh,
   url:	http://www.easyweb.co.uk			Scotland