On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:37:00 -0600
Bryen M Yunashko <suserocks(a)bryen.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 18:36 +0100, Wolfgang Hahnl
wrote:
I have read you discussion. There are a lot pros
and cons.
We have to have all this more simple. And I think I have missed
something.
So I have to ask some questions (Q) and will give some answers (A).
These is my way of thinking:
Sorry but I think you have overly-complicated the topic instead of
simplifying it. The question that was posed was what to do about all
those members who are no longer actively involved in the community in
any way at all.
Simple solution is obviously not possible, otherwise we would not have
one of "those" threads. It is also obvious that current thread is stuck
in the middle of nowhere just because it is trying to solve problem
that is created with initial simple division on Member and non-Member,
honorably called contributor, that is not sufficient as it left out
those that did contribute enough to be a Member, but at some point
they quit for one or another reason. (Like that wasn't possible to see
in advance.)
We either pull up the sleeves and create a bit more complicated
structure now or we are going to repeat endless discussions every few
months when some other point that can't be ignored comes up.
What is another problem with just adding third type of membership for
inactive members?
There is no definition what is qualifying activity to become member,
which was the case since ever, it is just arbitrary opinion of the day
by the board or later membership committee. IMHO, that is as it should
be as making more rules will not help that at some point someone has to
make a call and declare one person member, and the other with similar
activity not. The only thing that more rules (types and levels of
membership) will help is to make margin of error smaller, and make
people feel better.
I proposed some more complicated rules with more levels and types of
membership, which will solve current problems, create types of
membership that we don't have, like Honorable Member, and lower margin
of error when one has to make a call, but that is against rule of
simplicity :)
A very separate and potentially valid topic can be
originated
discussing ways to improve and recruit new contributions to
openSUSE. That is, and always should be, a sustained topic that we
all give thought to on a regular basis. But that's not the focus of
Robert's thread.
This discussion mentioned few times that we don't want to alienate
potential and current contributors by demonstrating insensibility in
a contribution treatment, so this discussion is not out of context of
growing user and contributor base. We can focus on question at hand,
but nothing will be solved unless we step back and see what we actually
want to achieve (which is what Wolfgang did).
--
Regards, Rajko
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org