[tor-relays] Open call for proposals for improving the health of the Tor relay operator community and the Tor network

[nusenu]

gus:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 11:26:07PM +0100, nusenu wrote:
>> I've got some practical experience with how things are (not) handled
>> by the Tor Project in this space which discourages involvement.
>> The past has also shown that proposals in this area are not
>> handled as tor proposals in the sense of [1].
> 
> I believe some proposals about relay operators were not handled as
> people had different opinions about the Tor Community governance and its
> process. 

I actually had something else in mind (see geko's reply) but
if you say that people had no clear understanding or different opinions about
community governance than it might also be a good time to start clarifying it.

The point "clarify and describe the different involved roles" as mentioned on Saturday's relay meetup
is a good start in this specific context and I agree that it will be useful.

>>> We're not in the process of approving any of them.
>>
>> a few questions:
>>
>> - Can you describe the process these proposals will undergo after they got collected?
>> - Who "approves" / rejects them?
>> - Will it be a public and transparent process?
>> - Who will be involved in the process?
>> - How are relay operators included and to what extend?
>>
>> - Will "approved" proposals be enforced?
>> - How will they get enforced? New tor release or directory authority vote?
>> - Will directory authorities be formally required to enforce "approved" proposals?
> 
> Great questions.
> 
> - Yes, it will be a public and transparent process;

When geko highlighted the sponsor in the meeting something along the lines of
"sitting down with our sponsor and defining criterias" (if you haven't been at the meeting don't take this too serious)
it made me wonder: If this is a public and transparent process, who is financing this work? (dubbed S112)

> Our goal is to build this governance process.

Do you have a timeline for building and defining the governance process
which probably should be the first thing to do
so people can make up their minds on whether they like
the process and want to be involved or not?


>>> adopted by a meaningful fraction of the Tor community (e.g.
>>> providing valid contact information).
>>
>> Can you elaborate on how you define "valid" in this context?
> 
> From the Expectations for relay operators:
> 
> "Be sure to set your ContactInfo to a working email address in case we
> need to reach you."

Since that document says nothing about verifying that string
"hopefully valid" is in my opinion a more accurate description for it
than "valid", no?

kind regards,
nusenu

-- 
https://nusenu.github.io