On Sunday July 4 2010 05:52:09 Rajko M. wrote:
On Saturday 03 July 2010 18:30:08 Stephan Kleine
On Sunday July 4 2010 00:55:03 Rajko M. wrote:
"Registered member" is OK for voting.
Being contributor and real person, is enough for that.
"Core member" must show more in some of our activities, with quantity,
quality and persistence. ...
I'm totally against creating different levels of "members" since that
just will open a bottomless can of worms why X is "only" a "member"
while Y is a "super member" but X does more than Y, at least in the
opinion of X or perhaps Z.
Sincerely I would live rather with a lot of contributors that sometimes
have above problem, and deal on case by case basis, than without many
contributors and no problems, as it is now.
Right, and that's why we are currently having a discussion about if
is the proper wording? (as in it is apparently already too hard to define some
It is easy to miss that when Joe introduced Ambassador
program number of
active contributors jumped a lot. Problem is that lack of ideas what
exactly to do with new people left many without direction and they left.
Small thing, calling somebody openSUSE ambassador attracted a lot of
people. Nothing to learn from this?
Point simply being is that you have the right to "vote" on certain targets of
the project and that right should be exclusive to people who proved they are
interested in said project by contributing. There is nothing that prevents
anyone from joining but the lack of contribution.
If you have some people wondering in what way they could contribute then fix
the wiki page since there are loads of ways.
In the first post I mentioned that majority needs lead
incentives to be active. If we don't give them, someone will.
Also it reminds me too much of that forum style
people based on their post count (which doesn't say anything most of the
If you did not notice they had two ratings, one is by number of posts, the
other is reputation, which is given by other users. In the new interface
they have Rate This Thread, but personal rating, reputation, disappeared.
I am aware of that but it doesn't make it less retarded (and no, this isn't
targeted at our forum but general forum style).
To make it short:
1. any X class "contributor system" is plain retarded IMHO since it doesn't
matter to the people who contribute.
2. if you start it I am out (but that is just me personally)
contribute in one way or the other and contribute enough you can
apply for membership which gives you e.g. the right to vote....
Voting is just one thing that motivate people, but not all nor many.
And the other things that motivate people in your opinion are what?
"Distinguished contributor" would be someone
that has no continuous
activity, but when is active we can see that.
Which just leads to having some definition for being a "Distinguished
contributor" which needs to draw the border to being a "normal member" -
as in it doesn't bring anything but just enlarges the problem.
The intention is not to make people comfortable with "all are equal" status
and do nothing. Whether you contribute, or not, you get your openSUSE
download. What is your reward for more effort that you put in a distro?
So what? The download is provided for free and the mere fact that you download
anything doesn't mean you contribute anything.
Besides that all people are not equal. Some part contributes and therefore is
a member or has the right to vote and the others haven't.
Distinguished, registered, core members get
promotional DVDs, small
presents, SLE, slx products, access to services, more publicity, formal
recognition in shape of awards for accomplishments, travel expenses, that
other don't. This is a bit more incentive to do more then it is now.
Right, that's why people e.g. got their free boxes for 11.2 as they got it for
earlier versions? How about starting to revert the cut down of free boxes for
people contributing to factory and then we see for the rest - as a start. I
fully agree that some motivation wouldn't harm but that has nothing to do with
the current subject.
contribute cause they like to do so.
In ideal world that is so. In real you get what you pay for.
No rewards, no activity.
I think you are misunderstanding something here ...
they can apply for membership. And if they get declined now they can
continue contributing and reapply later and then get admitted.
That is another point that we should change.
Now we wait until someone apply and get bunch of applications from people
that got it wrong and then when application is declined we expect that
they stay with a project. I don't think so.
So make it clear to them what is required in the first place. If they move
elsewhere cause their application has been declined cause they didn't do
anything cause they considered being a member mandatory for contributing then
there is certainly some communication failure but it has nothing to do with
the idea of being a member. Also the requirements are clearly stated.
Proactive approach will be more successful, at least
it will make wait list
non existent. When you see someone contributing then approach him and offer
registration. If offer is declined then good. Leave door open and let
him/her apply when he/she feels ready.
Right, that certainly sounds objective </irony>.
don't see any problem with this and IMHO this whole discussion how
to call it is somehow ridiculous and unnecessary - which is why I would
like to suggest to rename "member" to "potato" and be done with it.
From packaging perspective I can't see any difference, but from social
there is a big one.
Right, so fuck packaging and all go social since that would help ....
I am still waiting for your reasoning why:
1. "member" is bad in the first place (besides some "forum member" can
2. creating different levels of "membership" would do more good than harm.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org