PlanetUbuntuEditorialPolicy

Differences between revisions 2 and 3
⇤ ← Revision 2 as of 2007-05-02 03:22:08 →
Size: 2774
Editor: S010600502c03205f
Comment: fix lp link
← Revision 3 as of 2007-05-02 03:28:41 → ⇥
Size: 2779
Editor: 200-127-67-94
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 35: Line 35:
* A Canonical employee posts confidential information
* A community member blogs about a rumour based on outside information
* A community member blogs about a rumour based on an employee blog
* Another companies employee posts confidential information on their blog and thus planet
* Somebody objects to the contents of a blog post		  * A Canonical employee posts confidential information
 * A community member blogs about a rumour based on outside information
 * A community member blogs about a rumour based on an employee blog
 * Another companies employee posts confidential information on their blog and thus planet
 * Somebody objects to the contents of a blog post

Summary

Planet Ubuntu, an aggregate of community and Canonical employee blogs about Ubuntu, needs a clear editorial policy, to deal with issues of Canonical to community interactions, content disputes and the like. This spec attempts to create such a policy, for eventual approval by the Community Council.

Rationale

With the early May censorship of Planet Ubuntu by Canonical to prevent early disclosure of the Dell deal, it was made apparent that the current laise-faire method of Planet editorial policy was not working. In that incident, Canonical removed two blogs by community members, as well as one by an employee. In addition, future content disputes or other company to community interactions might require action, issues which should have a clear policy for dealing with.

Use Cases

Jane is a community member and wishes to write about rumours of a pending Canonical announcement. She is concerned about being censored, given the previous experience with the Dell deal. She wants reassurance that provided her information comes from outside sources, she is free to post about such deals.

Mark runs Canonical and wants to make certain that future deals are not jeopardized by accidental release of information by his employees. He wants to be able to remove his employees blogs without concerns of censorship

Larry runs an Ubuntu business and one of his employees whose blog is syndicated on Planet Ubuntu bas, either accidentally or not, leaked confidential information. He wants to be able to remove that blog from Planet Ubuntu in a confidential manner.

Sally has posted a followup to another blog post by an employee who leaked information. She wants to know what is going to happen to her blog post, now that the employees blog post has been pulled.

Eric objects to some content on their blog, content which does not violate the Code of Conduct. He wishes to know if there is a way and a venue to have a discussion about this content.

Scope

Covers planet.ubuntu.com

Implementation

Policies need to be created for the following situations:

  • A Canonical employee posts confidential information
  • A community member blogs about a rumour based on outside information
  • A community member blogs about a rumour based on an employee blog
  • Another companies employee posts confidential information on their blog and thus planet
  • Somebody objects to the contents of a blog post

Outstanding Issues

BoF agenda and discussion

CategorySpec

PlanetUbuntuEditorialPolicy (last edited 2008-08-06 16:27:05 by localhost)