[Famsco-list] Re: [Ambassadors] [Discussion] Reporting template for ambassadors.
thinklinux.ssh at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 15:35:05 UTC 2009
> To what end?? Are we going to kick out people who aren't performing up
> to some predefined amount of work??
> I find it awfully difficult to justify adding yet more overhead to
> people who are already working (and most likely quite busy)
Suppose, someone is not any more interested contributing, neither they
plan to do it again in future.
What we currently do is to keep their junk pages in the wiki.
People coming for help visits them, mails for help and get no reply.
Should not we ping our ambassadors periodically and ensure they are
still contributing or atleast interested in contributing? If someone
is contributing, fine. If someone is not available for sometime, let
him/her reply back that he/she will be unavailable for a specific
period of time.
Someone may be busy for a certain period of time, but that does not
mean he/she can not reply back his/her unavailability. If someone does
not reply in a month, it is for sure that he/she is not interested any
What we can do is mail all the ambassadors asking if they are still
"alive", if someone does not reply in a couple of week, send him/her
another ping and even he/she does not reply in a month, remove
My suggestion is not to kick out people, for a start, identify those
who are dead for Fedora and remove them.
> Don't get me wrong, I think accountability is a good thing - and in
> volunteer organizations it's the way to ensure that things get done,
> but not sure that mandatory reporting is the way to go. Generally I
> have found that within a volunteer organization the people who are
> going to do the work are going to go and get it done, occasionally
> they need some motivation. Periodic meetings are great from that, but
> I'd say that probably less than 10% of Ambassadors attend their
> regional meetings, and reporting would likely have even less effect.
More information about the Fedora-ambassadors-list