Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (301 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-project] Membership part II
- From: Bryen M Yunashko <suserocks@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:29:25 -0600
- Message-id: <1330554565.2128.171.camel@linux-sl6g>
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 23:19 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Gerald just made a contribution as I had to go look up and learn what
panopticon meant. :-)
Simplicity is the best solution and I think we have gone overboard in
discussing what defines a contribution and what tracks a contribution.
As I've said before, we keep the bar low in contribution determination
and our numbers prove it. Robert's proposal includes an honor-system
check mark box to indicate that you have continued to contribute. At
the very least, even if you have "lied" and done no contributions since
becoming a member, the check-box indicates you still have a vested
interest in the Project.
And ultimately, it is people who have a vested interest that vote.
This proposal was intended to provide a sane resolution to accounting
overabundance in our rosters. It has become anything but that and
combines multiple issues in what is supposed to have been a singular
issue and attempt at resolution.
Can we please stick to the intention and resolve that? I think my
stripped-down version of the proposal in this thread can do that. And
*then* if the very definition of contribution/contributor itself is
truly in question, we can address that separately. Though I am
unconvinced there is a real issue on that arena. This discussion has
allowed a non-valid issue (imo) to overshadow a valid issue.
Bryen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012, Robert Schweikert wrote:
We have set up a "hurdle" of contributions to become a member, why would
we not have the same expectation of someone who is a member?
In my mind, this "hurdle" should follow some form of hysteresis,
similar to thermostats.
To maintain membership past contributions should be considered as
well (not exclusively, but as well).
As a first approximation, I like the idea of a simple action or
signal of activity to retain membership once granted. I am not
in favor of the idea of a panopticum.
Gerald
--
Dr. Gerald Pfeifer <gp@xxxxxxxx> || SUSE || Director Product Management
Gerald just made a contribution as I had to go look up and learn what
panopticon meant. :-)
Simplicity is the best solution and I think we have gone overboard in
discussing what defines a contribution and what tracks a contribution.
As I've said before, we keep the bar low in contribution determination
and our numbers prove it. Robert's proposal includes an honor-system
check mark box to indicate that you have continued to contribute. At
the very least, even if you have "lied" and done no contributions since
becoming a member, the check-box indicates you still have a vested
interest in the Project.
And ultimately, it is people who have a vested interest that vote.
This proposal was intended to provide a sane resolution to accounting
overabundance in our rosters. It has become anything but that and
combines multiple issues in what is supposed to have been a singular
issue and attempt at resolution.
Can we please stick to the intention and resolve that? I think my
stripped-down version of the proposal in this thread can do that. And
*then* if the very definition of contribution/contributor itself is
truly in question, we can address that separately. Though I am
unconvinced there is a real issue on that arena. This discussion has
allowed a non-valid issue (imo) to overshadow a valid issue.
Bryen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |