Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (465 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] Naming registered members of openSUSE
  • From: Satoru Matsumoto <helios_reds@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 16:38:38 +0900
  • Message-id: <4C36D1FE.9070603@xxxxxxx>
(2010/07/09 9:14), Bryen M. Yunashko wrote:

I appreciate the comments you've made and your points are very valid
in this email. No opposition from me. But the point of my injection
into this thread was to get us to stop focusing on "NAME" and focus
on "FUNCTION".

Let's debate the functionality of the group(s) as I have proposed.
Then after we get that figured out, then a naming convention will
fall in naturally.

OK. Let's get back on the track.

A question that's been on my mind is: "Is 'Member' an honorable title
for 'specifically distinguished contributors who *once brought* a
continued and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project'?"

In other words, the title 'Member' and the benefits that come with are
'token of openSUSE project's sincere appreciation for their contributions'?

If the answer is 'Yes', giving too much authorities to Members may not
be a good thing.

Authority and duty, or, powers and functions should be inextricably
linked, that is, authority should be given not to a person but to a role.

You know, Board is a role. Therefore, Board members may have special
privileges in order to fulfill their responsibilities. That is very
reasonable.

Same can be said for Forum moderators, Wiki sysop, members of some
teams, etc. - they have both privileges and responsibilities. Once (s)he
leaves his/her position, those privileges should be removed.

On the other hand, Members will have their benefits for eternity, even
if they won't contribute to openSUSE anymore, because there's no
reconfirmation procedure for existing Members.

What we really need is not a hierarchy, but a set of roles.

So, I'd propose:

* Each Team and local community will elect a leader (or leaders).
* The leaders will assume responsibility for maintaining the list of
*active* members in their Team/community and reporting the statistics
of their Team/community regularly.
* Those *active* members will be considered "openSUSE Advocates (this
can be replaced with a better name later ;-))" and have right to vote
Board members.

Advantages of this system are:

* Board members don't need to verify and sort out applicants for
membership.
- I think this is a very important point, because the current system -
only Members who are approved by Board can elect Board members - is a
little bit inconsistent.
* We can always figure out who are the *present* active contributors.
* It will be much easier for contributors who are not good at English to
become "openSUSE Advocates", because they can explain how and what
they contribute to openSUSE to leaders of their local communities in
their own languages.

What do you think ?

I refer to my mother's most favorite quote that I often have
repeated to others.... "Form must always follow function."

Please tell your mother that someone who live in far east Japan respect
her for her wisdom. ;-)

Best,

--
_/_/ Satoru Matsumoto - openSUSE Member - Japan _/_/
_/_/ Marketing/Weekly News/openFATE Screening Team _/_/
_/_/ mail: helios_reds_at_gmx.net / irc: HeliosReds _/_/
_/_/ http://blog.zaq.ne.jp/opensuse/ _/_/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >