I would say it’s more that my ban was the “straw that broke the camel’s back”. MAL has been an active participant in ban discussions for years, has made many good suggestions, all of which were seemingly ignored.
Neither is this the first time SC members have expressed deep discomfort with performing tasks that are generally far outside their areas of core competence. But “information asymmetry” applies in all directions, and I’m not at liberty to disclose what prior SC members have told me in private.
How? I’ve done everything humanly possible to be as transparent and open about everything I know on my blog. Which by now contains dozens of specific claims, not a one of which, to date, has been disputed.by anyone, or even publicly acknowledged as having been made by any PSF representative.
The stonewalling is total. It’s also the case that I told the SC, in advance, about almost all the things I would be saying if they didn’t speak up first, and about how that would be perceived, and about how that would in turn increase community damage. But they never replied to anything I sent after Aug 8, the day after the ban was announced. I personally was totally stonewalled too.
So you can perhaps understand why I find “we should definitely discuss” disingenuous too. If “we” means PSF representatives, they certainly appear to be utterly determined to never clarify anything about my case.
For the rest, I too would like to see it spelled out who would do the CoC enforcement currently done by the SC. But perhaps nothing will ever change unless something forces change. Getting the SC out of the ban business first would certainly light a fire that would make filling that gap an urgent priority.
I was on the Board, and voted for the first CoC the PSF adopted. Enforcement was the Board’s responsibility then. That’s the most natural place for enforcement to fall. Whether the Board wants to set up another group for enforcement is, of course, up to them. But it should not fall on the SC. They hate doing it, “tach nerds” aren’t generally suited to this kind of work, and at least IMO they are in fact poor at doing it. Not starting with my ban either.
Perhaps they do a stellar job at resolving less contentious cases that we never hear about. But the total lack of transparency about CoC enforcement actions in general - even of that they exist - is another long-time complaint that’s never been addressed,
Right now is at least the third time over the years I’ll suggest the minimal level of “CoC transparency report” produced for PyCons would already be a huge improvement for the CoC WG and SC to produce.