[Ambassadors] Active/Inactive Ambassadors+task+some idea

[Thomas Chung]

On 4/9/07, Greg Dekoenigsberg <gdk at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Francesco Ugolini wrote:
>
> > Stay sure, we don't want to "kill" people, we know the different needs
> > of each ambassador. We want to shake people that do nothing.
>
> Why?
>
> Why do we want to "shake people that do nothing"?  What harm do they do?
> And what's to say that someone who does nothing today won't be someone who
> does something vitally important later?  And what's your threshhold for
> "activity" -- somebody says "I'm active"?
>
> The *only* effect of *any* inactivity policy will be to announce to
> people, "we don't want you, go away."
>
> My $0.02: once somebody says "I am a Fedora ambassador," then they are a
> Fedora ambassador, FOR LIFE.  Until (a) they say "no thanks, I'm not an
> ambassador anymore," or (b) they do something that disgraces Fedora, and
> FAMSCO drums them out.
>
> =====
>
> So let me back up and ask a question.  What's the *real* goal here?
>
> Is the goal to recognize our best ambassadors?
>
> Is the goal to know who can be "counted upon" to get stuff done?
>
> What are we trying to accomplish with the active/inactive proposal?
>
> --g
>
> --
> Greg DeKoenigsberg
> Community Development Manager
> Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
> "To whomsoever much hath been given...
> ...from him much shall be asked"


All,

I'm sorry I was away from this whole discussion.
It's time for me to step in stop this once for all.

Yes, Greg is *absolutely* correct. This entire discussion is not
helping our project but tearing us apart. I even noticed some of us
planning to leave the project because this discussion.

I *urge* you stop this non-productive proposal and I would to hear
more productive ideas.
Please consider this is my last call to end this discussion.

Fedora Ambassadors Steering Committee Chair
-- 
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung