[missinglugnut]

I think one of the hardest problems in community moderation is finding good moderators.

A moderator's job description involves outlining fault in other people's words and occasionally punishing them for it. That sort of thing is tedious to most people, but thrilling to some very emotionally unhealthy ones. Few people who want the job can be trusted with the power.

I fear the python steering council has been lost to people who don't have the maturity to talk through problems in a healthy way.

[zahlman]

Fortunately, the Steering Council at least consists of annually re-elected members.

The same can't be said for the Code of Conduct Work Group, or most other Work Groups, or for Discourse forum moderators.

I actually can't find any documentation anywhere of the election process for the PSF Board of Directors, or anything about how Officers are selected. Not on psf.python.org, not on the PSF blog, not on Mr. Willamson's blog (as a former board member whose blog was recently shared on HN); not as a PEP (that only covers the Steering Council). All I know is that a few new members are elected annually, but not how long their terms are.

(But I can easily find a diversity statement.)

[bbor]

That is weird. They have a list of the results (https://www.python.org/nominations/elections/), lists of boards going back a few years (https://www.python.org/psf/board/), but no details. Presumably they post their official Bylaws/founding documents somewhere that they filed with the state, and it'd be in there?

FWIW diversity is important regardless of their website quality. Perfection is the enemy of improvement, IMHO.

[wakawaka28]

The issue is not that wannabe moderators and "leaders" are merely immature. They are cunning activists and opportunists. The right approach is to throw out anyone who insists on co-opting an open software project to advance goals that are not directly related to the project's purpose. This is especially obvious when they start trying to censor or ban people over disagreements and opinions outside the scope of the project.