[Ambassadors] Active/Inactive Ambassadors

[Francesco Ugolini]

Active Ambassador is a person who report his work, it's not important to
do this trough M-L or irc, he can send a mail to FAmSCo or to another
ambassadors that will report your activity, but we need reports.

For the rest we can work to solve those issues.

Thank your for your ideas and observations.

Regards

Francesco Ugolini

Jim Nanney ha scritto:
> Francesco Ugolini wrote:
>> A LITTLE ADVICE (not referred to this post): i know I've written a lot
>> of posts, but please, first to reply to a mail, please read all messages
>> written by me (or the first 5 with this topic), because it's unpractical
>> to write the same things a lot of time.
> 
>> Yes, in fact, the kick-off is the second part of my proposal, the first
>> one is to mark ambassadors, who don't work, inactive.
> 
>> After this, i don't know if my English is so worst as it seems to be, i
>> not say that people who don't follow irc meetings would be marked inactive.
> 
>> For the title question i think it's the best way to prize working
>> ambassadors (but we can discuss lately, first of all focus your
>> attention on inactive/active proposal).
> 
>> Regards
> 
>> Francesco Ugolini
> 
> 
> I apologize on having missed some in your original proposal to the list.
>  I've read them all, but missed part of the original.
> 
> I agree with marking Active vs Inactive.  However I strongly disagree
> with removing after your proposed 6 months on the inactive list.
> 
> I believe the problem needs better definition before we can find a good
> solution.
> 
> I believe the titles are a separate and completely disenchanting idea,
> and it appears we should focus on this later.
> 
> So as a group we should focus on the Active/Inactive.  First let's
> define the problem and it's scope.
> 
> Defining the Problem
> --------------------
> 
> The problem as related to your original email is too many Ambassadors
> who are not corresponding their efforts through the Mailing List or IRC
> Meetings, or in Real Life.
> 
> How does the problem translate to the real world?  If a potential Fedora
> User were to contact an inactive Ambassador and get no response, he/she
> could possibly shy away from Fedora.  So there is harm in having
> non-responsive Ambassadors.  Does Inactive == Non-responsive?  Possibly.
> 
> Defining Active
> ---------------
> 
> 1. Obviously, communication is key. So people communicating should be
> considered as active. So attending IRC or even posting on the M/L is
> considered as active.
> 
> 2. People promoting Fedora in the role of an Ambassador should be
> considered active. This is the gray area that needs definition.
> 
> For me, I would consider my work with the Freemedia project to count me
> as active.  I would also consider the work I do in promoting Fedora at
> my LUG to count as well. These are examples of things I would consider
> Active.
> 
> Defining Inactive
> -----------------
> 
> This cannot be just the inverse of active, because activity in promoting
> Fedora in any way, even one not listed, would have to be considered active.
> 
> My best guess on Inactive is - Anyone who has not promoted Fedora within
> the previous year. Better defining this would greatly help.
> 
> Defining the Scope
> ------------------
> 
> Just how many Ambassadors are in the Inactive Category?  This will tell
> how big of a problem it really is.  So how do you quantify how many
> Inactive Ambassadors there are?  We would need a built in measurement of
> this.
> 
> -
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> If this has been discussed previously, forgive me, and throw this in the
> junk folder. :)
> 
> --Jim
> 
> 

--
Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list


-- 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FrancescoUgolini