extend and clarify scope and motivation

rfcs/0111-public-only-comms.md

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 ---
-feature: public communication
+feature: public, focused communication
 start-date: 2021/10/27
 author: nrdxp
 shepherd-team: TBD
@@ -27,6 +27,23 @@ of any such room in principle, only that it not be officially sanctioned by the
 project unless any such channel be willing to act in an open and auditable
 fashion.
 
+Ignoring the personal implications for the moment, which will be addressed in
+the following section, this is seen as necesary for any reasonably large
+institution which wishes to be seen, by an obseving public, to be operating in
+a transparent and _provably_ trustworthy fashion. This is especially true for a
+large open source project such as NixOS. Any promises of transparency in action
+are dead on arrival if official communications are to be seen, in any manner,
+to be deliberately sealed.
+
+Importantly, this is not a value judgement on particular individuals in the
+community, nor does it require that each individual share the value of openness
+as primary in their personal affairs. Only that they formally recognize this as
+an official value of the NixOS Organization itself.
+
+Equally importantly, this is more than just a simple statement of value. It is
+a request to align our _actions_ with our _values_ to avoid further ambiguity
+and conflict.
+
 # Detailed design
 [design]: #detailed-design
 
@@ -35,18 +52,67 @@ hosted under `nixos.org` be made and kept public. Should this RFC be accepted,
 the transition should be organized and enacted within a reasonable time frame,
 no later than two months from the date of acceptance.
 
+In addition, any currently existing topics which are not strictly related to
+Nix in either technical or operational terms, should also be moved within the
+same time frame. Most likely to unofficial or semi-official Nix Community
+Matrix Space. This is so that the scope of official communications can be kept
+to a reasonable baseline for moderators and operators.
+
+# Examples and Interactions
+[examples-and-interactions]: #examples-and-interactions
+
+The very intention of this RFC, in letter, and in spirit is to improve the
+transparent communication between disparate members of the community, which has
+already come to a head elsewhere in both public and private, to the point that
+certain members of the community have expressed a need to self segregate! This
+is clearly _not_ sustainable long term, and NixOS _should_ take a hard and
+clear stance suggesting that while we, in no way, codemn the act of private
+communications and coordinations, our _official_ stance is one of collaboration
+and openness.
+
+This sends the signal that, if any serious contribution or opinion is to be
+laid bear, it should be done publicly, even if the details or the organization
+of which is to occur privately. Whether it seems apparent up front or not to
+any particular individual, the continued and officially endorsed segration of
+large subsections of the NixOS community is detrimental to its cohesion and
+continuity. This will only exacerbate as the divergence grows.
+
+Additionally, the importance and primacy of openness was weighed carefully by
+the author against the potential for further conflict. It was deemed that
+further conflict was, in the current state of affairs, inevitable and therefore
+only incidental should it arise during the course of this RFC. Unless and until
+decisions are made about the heirarcy of values in the NixOS Organization, such
+conflict will be inevitable.
+
+And to be sure, a certain amount of conflict is _always_ present, and sometimes
+even healthy. The target of focus here, then, is the type by which core values
+are pitted against one another. This tends to lead to very personalized and
+unproductive conversations, which has already, demonstrably led to a large
+group of individuals feeling both unwelcome, and worse, unsafe in the official
+communication streams.
+
+So it was hoped that if conflict did arise, it could be resolved respectfully
+and honestly in the RFC discussion thread and follow up meetings. It is for
+precisely this reason that your author did not hide his initial motivation for
+drafting, despite the obvious and somewhat _easy_ conception that it was merely
+an attack on a particular group of individuals. The good faith that has been
+extended is therefore expected in return.
+
+The design has been updated accordingly. Admittedly, and intentionally, this is
+not an attempt to address _all_ of these problems in one fell swoop, but
+instead to set a solid foundation for future policy RFCs.
+
 # Drawbacks
 [drawbacks]: #drawbacks
 
 Given that opening a private channel on another host is trivial, there do not
-seem to be any major drawbacks.
+seem to be any major drawbacks technically.
 
 # Alternatives
 [alternatives]: #alternatives
 
 * Allow private channels under certain well defined circumstances
 * Allow private channels with no restrictions
-* Keep the current ambiguous state of affairs
 
 # Unresolved questions
 [unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
@@ -58,4 +124,9 @@ seem to be any major drawbacks.
 [future]: #future-work
 
 Ensure any newly created communication channels are made public from their
-inception.
+inception, and ensure they are on topic for some specific aspect of Nix
+development or adminstration.
+
+As further work, future policy driven RFCs should be drafted to decide things
+such as secondary values held in the community. Official process for moderation,
+official process for moderating the _moderator_, among other things.