[Ambassadors] Active/Inactive Ambassadors

[Hernan Pachas]

+1

On 4/3/07, Jim Nanney <jnanney at mscoast.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Francesco Ugolini wrote:
> > A LITTLE ADVICE (not referred to this post): i know I've written a lot
> > of posts, but please, first to reply to a mail, please read all messages
> > written by me (or the first 5 with this topic), because it's unpractical
> > to write the same things a lot of time.
> >
> > Yes, in fact, the kick-off is the second part of my proposal, the first
> > one is to mark ambassadors, who don't work, inactive.
> >
> > After this, i don't know if my English is so worst as it seems to be, i
> > not say that people who don't follow irc meetings would be marked inactive.
> >
> > For the title question i think it's the best way to prize working
> > ambassadors (but we can discuss lately, first of all focus your
> > attention on inactive/active proposal).
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Francesco Ugolini
> >
>
> I apologize on having missed some in your original proposal to the list.
>  I've read them all, but missed part of the original.
>
> I agree with marking Active vs Inactive.  However I strongly disagree
> with removing after your proposed 6 months on the inactive list.
>
> I believe the problem needs better definition before we can find a good
> solution.
>
> I believe the titles are a separate and completely disenchanting idea,
> and it appears we should focus on this later.
>
> So as a group we should focus on the Active/Inactive.  First let's
> define the problem and it's scope.
>
> Defining the Problem
> - --------------------
>
> The problem as related to your original email is too many Ambassadors
> who are not corresponding their efforts through the Mailing List or IRC
> Meetings, or in Real Life.
>
> How does the problem translate to the real world?  If a potential Fedora
> User were to contact an inactive Ambassador and get no response, he/she
> could possibly shy away from Fedora.  So there is harm in having
> non-responsive Ambassadors.  Does Inactive == Non-responsive?  Possibly.
>
> Defining Active
> - ---------------
>
> 1. Obviously, communication is key. So people communicating should be
> considered as active. So attending IRC or even posting on the M/L is
> considered as active.
>
> 2. People promoting Fedora in the role of an Ambassador should be
> considered active. This is the gray area that needs definition.
>
> For me, I would consider my work with the Freemedia project to count me
> as active.  I would also consider the work I do in promoting Fedora at
> my LUG to count as well. These are examples of things I would consider
> Active.
>
> Defining Inactive
> - -----------------
>
> This cannot be just the inverse of active, because activity in promoting
> Fedora in any way, even one not listed, would have to be considered active.
>
> My best guess on Inactive is - Anyone who has not promoted Fedora within
> the previous year. Better defining this would greatly help.
>
> Defining the Scope
> - ------------------
>
> Just how many Ambassadors are in the Inactive Category?  This will tell
> how big of a problem it really is.  So how do you quantify how many
> Inactive Ambassadors there are?  We would need a built in measurement of
> this.
>
> -
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> If this has been discussed previously, forgive me, and throw this in the
> junk folder. :)
>
> - --Jim
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGEp+I3GRPSy3vDJMRAobvAKDZI+VDJ31BWXSvQ4lrlMhgudgTWACeO18g
> 87Tshj5VRNRDK+60Md3ymCU=
> =Q8Ot
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
>