Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (301 mails)

[Robert Schweikert <rjschwei@xxxxxxxx>]

On 02/16/2012 07:20 PM, Bryen M Yunashko wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-02-16 at 17:50 -0500, Robert Schweikert wrote:
> > ways, please focus on the topic at hand, avoid rants, and be kind.
> > > > Proposal:
> > > > =======
> > > > At a time 4 month' prior to a member's even number year anniversary
> > > > (that would be year 2, 4, 6...) attempts will be made to contact the
> > > > member via the known e-mail address. Initial contact attempts will be
> > > > automated to reduce work for the membership committee.
> > > >
> > > > The automated e-mail will contain a link to a web page that enables the
> > > > member to check areas of contributions to the project. Submission of the
> > > > form results in automatic membership "renewal" until the next even
> > > > number anniversary of the member.
> > >
> > > Some clarification requested here.  As part of the previous discussion
> > > centered around what to do about "no-longer-contributing" members, does
> > > this part of the proposal indicate that contribution, or
> > > non-contribution since initial membership is not a factor for renewal?
> >
> > No, contribution is the "renewal". One has to contribute to become a
> > member in the first place, why would we not expect the same level of
> > effort from the person to be a member?
>
> The text of your proposal states:
>
> "Submission of the form results in automatic membership "renewal" until
> the next even number anniversary of the member."
>
> If submission of renewal form results in automatic renewal then that
> implies that verification of continued contribution is bypassed.  That
> is what I was seeking clarification on.

Yes, it is. But it is still verifiable if a member of the membership 
committee chooses to do so. Please consider that in addition to the 
proposal on the membership I suggested a system, and filed a FATE entry, 
that would support an "automated renewal" process based on contribution 
recognition. Therefore, the automatic renewal based on a web form 
submission backed by the honor system would not degrade the current 
situation and could be considered temporary.

> > It is all about contribution, that's in the end why we have a
> > contribution criteria to become a member in the first place.
>
> And that is not clearly emphasized in the wording of this proposal.  I
> may be getting into semantics here, but the automated renewal section
> does imply no continued contribution is necessary.

Well, lets just make the assumption that those who once contributed to 
the project or currently contribute have the best interest of the 
project in mind and can set their ego aside when needed. If people no 
longer contribute for whatever reason why would they go to the form and 
submit it?

> > > Let me propose this change in wording from:
> > >
> > > "...a member of the membership committee will make
> > > an attempt to contact the member..."
> > >
> > > to:
> > >
> > > "...a member of the membership committee may make
> > > an attempt to contact the member..."
> >
> > Well, but his was exactly one of the points, even pointed out by you, in
> > the first go around. People being afraid that we might "loose" someone
> > because automated e-mails get ignore/filtered/whatever, or e-mail
> > addresses may have changed.....
>
> Yes I did.  :-)  And I still stand by that point.  But I also don't feel
> strongly about making it a requirement to be imposed upon the membership
> committee, but a "hoped-for" attitude that they (along with the rest of
> the community) will consciously engage in an effort to keep our
> community in existence and growing.  It's the wording I was concerned
> with, not the intention.   I am only asking for a single word change
> "will" to "may."  :-)
>
> > > The "resuming contributions" lends the question I posed earlier about
> > > criteria for renewal.  I think we have thus a confusing point here that
> > > needs clarification.   As I read this overall proposal, it states that
> > > if you are presently a member and wish to renew it, no proof of
> > > contribution is required.
> >
> > No, the proposal states that to "renew" you go to a web page and mark
> > off the areas where you contribute.
> Ok so somehow I missed this part.   If I read this clearly now, if
> someone were to check off some boxes (truthfully or not) and then click
> submit, their membership would be automatically renewed.   In other
> words, we renew on an honor system.  I guess I could be okay with that.

Yes, honor system should really work for us. And the submitted form 
information is available and is verifiable. I just do not see the need 
for the membership team to have to verify the same member's 
contributions every two years. Then again, hopefully an automated system 
can be implemented that eliminates all of this to begin with.

> Does this same automated process exist for the honorary members?

No, honorable members do nothing, by definition. They are honorable 
members because they have contributed in the past but are no longer 
actively involved in the project.

Robert

--
Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
Tech Lead
rjschwei@xxxxxxxx
rschweik@xxxxxxxxxx
781-464-8147
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx