[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Ambassadors] [Discussion] Reporting template for ambassadors.



Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like this very subject is brought
up at least once every calendar year. I can only speak for myself but
is someone is an ambassador regardless of how active they appear to be
to other ambassadors if they aren't asking for $$ or other stuff what
does it matter? Does it somehow diminish your role as an ambassador? I
don't think it does.

Can Karsten or Max or someone please make a goddamn decision and put
this to rest once an for all and make an entry into the wiki
somewhere?

-t

Tony Guntharp
Co-Founder SourceForge.net
fusion94 gmail com
1 (415) 694-3732



On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 21:34, Roy Ong <me royong com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 12:27 +0800, Jason Benedict Low wrote:
>> +
>>
>> susmit shannigrahi wrote:
>> > > We had such discussion twice or more since Ambassadors come to life.
>> > > If you take a look at the past years M-L archive you will find that,
>> > > at the end of the discussion, the conclusions were that nobody should
>> > > be removed even if inactive: we SHOULD concentrate on active members.
>> > >
>> >
>> > This is not about active/inactive thing. This is about *dead*
>> > ambassadors.  They are different.
>> >
>> > I agree nobody should be removed if inactive, they need mentoring.
>> > I don't agree that nobody should be removed even if he left the project.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > I can assure you that actually is possible to understand who is active
>> > > or not: take a look at event reports, M-L activity, IRC presence and,
>> > > eveteamsn if we didn't see them, to the thousands of micro events around
>> > > the earth (LUG meetings etc). All those facts should encourage us not
>> > > to think at the inactive side, but working improving active
>> > > ambassadors experience.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I am, in fact many of us are not at all interested in knowing who are inactive.
>> > We want the ambassadors who are not anymore with fedora to be removed,
>> > just because of the simple fact is these are coming into our way with
>> > their dead wiki pages.
>> >
>> > Almost all the other teams do their house cleaning. Doc team does,
>> > packaging team does. So what's the problem with us?
>> > inode0 said a nice thing on IRC that if we don't do house keeping, we
>> > will end up with 20000 pages of ambassadors and 90% of them
>> > unresponsive.
>> >
>> > Also I have problem with dead ambassadors personally.
>> >
>> > When people cone us to me and say "Fedora ambassadors are non
>> > responsive...in spite of having 120 Ambassadors for India, nobody
>> > helped us", I feel bad.
>> >
>> > This was not because we are inactive, this person went to the wiki
>> > page of some local ambassador who are dead. So he didn't got any reply
>> > from any of them in spite of repeated emails.
>> >
>> > If we choose too ignore the issue, these allegations will increase
>> > rapidly in near future.
>> > I am not, rather we are not ok with that.
>> >
>> > Thannks.
>> >
>> >
>
> + +
> i think there is a need to agree on a proper definition of "dead
> ambassadors" ...
>
>
> --
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
>


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]