I’m not sure this is the fix we’re looking for unless there’s a very extensive, consistent, and stable allocation of resources. We’ve had Canonical’s time and people as aforementioned, including people filling roles within the Community Council, and most just faded away. As I said before, when you’re a business, you go where the money is. If the perception is that the most profitable way is to focus on something else, like, say, Snaps, then that’s what you’re going to focus on. Similarly, if you’re an employee and you’re feeling overworked or otherwise unmotivated, you’re probably not going to work too hard on fulfilling some volunteer role.
I agree with the idea of the Community Council having a very clearly defined role. It currently really only has the defined role of upholding the Code of Conduct, so it’s essentially no more than a police force by definition. This is not sufficient. It should be tasked with defining and maintaining the vision for the the project and also serve as a bit of a liason between the different stakeholders— developers, users, Canonical, their employees, etc. It should provide regular, clear, reports on what is happening. The time frame for those reports should be clearly defined. This all sounds like a lot of bureaucracy when we’re trying to simply governance, but I can see us loosening up the process of establishing the parts of the governance structure, while making expectations more clear. In this way, we shouldn’t get random nominees, but those that really feel like they want to commit.
Speaking of the Code of Conduct, it is a project that one can file merge proposals and bug reports against. Last time we were involved in Google Code-In, there was a task to sign the CoC and file bugs as they were found. We got a number of them, actually. They deserved further review, but, unfortunately, as was previously stated, nearly all of the most recent CC just stopped contributing. By definition, one doesn’t act alone in a Council.
I think the saddest thing of all is that those folks we had tasked to uphold the CoC failed to fulfill one of its most prominent requirements:
Step down considerately
When somebody leaves or disengages from the project, we ask that they do so in a way that minimises disruption to the project. They should tell people they are leaving and take the proper steps to ensure that others can pick up where they left off.
The ennui that was allowed to develop to allow for such a thing is something we should endeavour to absolutely extinguish any possibility of occuring again.