[Ambassadors] [Discussion] Reporting template for ambassadors.

[Francesco Ugolini]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Neville A. Cross <nacross at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Should this means that a more inclusive document has to be accepted by
> ambassadors Or maybe it points to the need to a "members only pages"
> that will allow ambassadors to have more info regarding other
> ambassadors, than what will be available to the public? I just
> thinking out loud here.

I'm just wondering if currently is possible to create a global page
with all the name and details. Personal pages are made by Ambassadors
themselves, this means there aren't any obstacles. My concerns were
related to Ambassadors maps etc.

> I think the most urgent topic is to shake the tree so the "dead"
> leaves fall. Better if this can became a process  to avoid
> accumulation of non relevant data. Streamlining the info, may help to
> figure out if more complex actions are required.

We had such discussion twice or more since Ambassadors come to life.
If you take a look at the past years M-L archive you will find that,
at the end of the discussion, the conclusions were that nobody should
be removed even if inactive: we SHOULD concentrate on active members.

I can assure you that actually is possible to understand who is active
or not: take a look at event reports, M-L activity, IRC presence and,
even if we didn't see them, to the thousands of micro events around
the earth (LUG meetings etc). All those facts should encourage us not
to think at the inactive side, but working improving active
ambassadors experience.

Your attention to such topic underline the importance you give to the
project, and, using and sharing this passion, we should create a
better future for Fedora.

Just to be clear: with the new Membership Policy (see September 08 M-L
archive), we have enhanced the joining process, know it would be
difficult to have people that automatically fill a form, but, whoever
want to became an ambassadors, should follow a process (many of us
have just tried it).

> Should be that ambassadors get a yearly reminder to refresh their
> membership and failing to answer that automated email within a month
> move you to inactive status. Failing twice delete the account. It is
> just an idea. The time frame may need better thinking.

See the considerations above. BTW, as I just said, this situation was
reduced with the new Membership policies.

Regards

Francesco Ugolini