Re: ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Robert Scheck]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jack Aboutboul wrote:
>  so my first question would be to ask this, how many people currently
>  subscribe to both this and ambassadors-list?  If people feel like it is
>  a significant enough number, maybe we should consider merging the two,
>  although, technically, the purposes are very different.  Although that
>  may be true, if we have a significant number of dual memberships, having
>  two sources from which to get information and post information to might
>  be a little excessive,
>  
>  What do you guys think? 
Sorry for being unpolite now, but why the hell don't you ask the people on
the ambassadors list? Maybe I should ask here and now, whether we can merge
devel-list with the marketing-list as well? ;-)

Please DO NOT MERGE the lists, we need a low-traffic (?) list for all the
ambassadors which only belongs to the ambassadors. Marketing is important;
yes and blah-foo and all the other arguments, but I mostly don't care about
the marketing stuff. I'm only less interested about this and that article
of Fedora in newspapers/magazines/websites/... - maybe others are thinking
so as well.

My 0.1 cent for a possible merge of the lists: -1000 :)


Greetings,
  Robert

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Bart Couvreur]

Op maandag 14-01-2008 om 20:26 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Robert
Scheck:
>  On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jack Aboutboul wrote:
>  > so my first question would be to ask this, how many people currently
>  > subscribe to both this and ambassadors-list?  If people feel like it is
>  > a significant enough number, maybe we should consider merging the two,
>  > although, technically, the purposes are very different.  Although that
>  > may be true, if we have a significant number of dual memberships, having
>  > two sources from which to get information and post information to might
>  > be a little excessive,
>  > 
>  > What do you guys think?
>  
>  Sorry for being unpolite now, but why the hell don't you ask the people on
>  the ambassadors list? Maybe I should ask here and now, whether we can merge
>  devel-list with the marketing-list as well? ;-) 
Probably because we are expected to be on the marketing-list too :-)
>  
>  Please DO NOT MERGE the lists, we need a low-traffic (?) list for all the
>  ambassadors which only belongs to the ambassadors. Marketing is important;
>  yes and blah-foo and all the other arguments, but I mostly don't care about
>  the marketing stuff. I'm only less interested about this and that article
>  of Fedora in newspapers/magazines/websites/... - maybe others are thinking
>  so as well. 
Partly true. I do agree that all the "Fedora in the news" isn't really
that interesting, maybe this should be moved off to the news-list. I do
get the basic idea behind it, and in a sense it's good: put all guys
promoting Fedora on the same page and being sure that we bring the same
message. If you think about it: we *are* as Ambassadors also doing
marketing for Fedora. Just more in a face-to-face fashion, compared to
press releases, interviews with the devels.

Some people don't want to be Ambassadors but are doing a kick-ass job on
marketing, and we as Ambassadors do that too, but we're both with the
same goal: promoting Fedora
>  
>  My 0.1 cent for a possible merge of the lists: -1000 :) 
So I'd be okay with the merge *if* some stuff gets sorted out.

+1 last year, stays +1 this year.

Bart


Small BTW: last years vote was slightly positive in the favor of
merging, so it's not bad to re-evaluate what was said back then.

-- 
Bart <couf(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; <couf(a)skynet.be&gt;
key fingerprint: 6AAB 544D 3432 D013 776D  3602 ADB6 6B2A D93F 0F93

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Paul Stauffer]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:48:21PM +0100, Bart Couvreur wrote:
>  Op maandag 14-01-2008 om 20:26 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Robert
>  Scheck:
>  > Sorry for being unpolite now, but why the hell don't you ask the people on
>  > the ambassadors list? Maybe I should ask here and now, whether we can merge
>  > devel-list with the marketing-list as well? ;-)
>  
>  Probably because we are expected to be on the marketing-list too :-) 
Perhaps it would be a good idea for one of the list admins (Max? Thomas?) to
do a quick diff of the membership lists of these two lists and see if there
is as much of an intersection as we're assuming.  If it turns out that f-a-l
membership is primarily just a subset of f-m-l membership, then the question
is really just whether the ambassadors want to continue to have a separate
list or not.  And conversely, if the intersection is smaller than we're
assuming, then that might imply that a merger is unwarranted.

Being on both lists myself, and recognizing the close interaction of the
work of both groups, and thus the extremely heavy cross-posting between the
two lists, I myself would be happy for a merger, just to cut down the number
of duplicate messages in my inbox.  But, y'know, I can deal either way. :)

cheers,
- Paul

-- 
Paul Stauffer <paulds(a)bu.edu&gt;
Manager of Research Computing
Computer Science Department
Boston University

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Thomas Chung]

On 14/01/2008, Paul Stauffer <paulds(a)bu.edu&gt; wrote:
>  Perhaps it would be a good idea for one of the list admins (Max?
> Thomas?) to
>  do a quick diff of the membership lists of these two lists and see if there
>  is as much of an intersection as we're assuming.  If it turns out that f-a-l
>  membership is primarily just a subset of f-m-l membership, then the question
>  is really just whether the ambassadors want to continue to have a separate
>  list or not.  And conversely, if the intersection is smaller than we're
>  assuming, then that might imply that a merger is unwarranted.
>
>  Being on both lists myself, and recognizing the close interaction of the
>  work of both groups, and thus the extremely heavy cross-posting between the
>  two lists, I myself would be happy for a merger, just to cut down the number
>  of duplicate messages in my inbox.  But, y'know, I can deal either way. :) 
Back in March, Karsten Wade touched on this issue[1] already what's
considered OffTopic[2].

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-March/msg0001...
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PostIsOffTopic#fedora-ambassadors-list

Basically, fedora-ambassadors-list is for discussions amongst
Ambassadors about event coordination and other tactical or project
business needs.

Other discussions should take place in fedora-marketing-list.
Regards,
-- 
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Robert Scheck]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Thomas Chung wrote:
>  Basically, fedora-ambassadors-list is for discussions amongst
>  Ambassadors about event coordination and other tactical or project
>  business needs.
>
>  Other discussions should take place in fedora-marketing-list. 
Thomas, thank you :)

And as long as ambassadors are something else than marketing, please move
that merging crap to /dev/null - otherwise, I'll change my .procmail rules
to move the merged list mails then to /dev/null forever...sorry.

Discussions about events don't have to be on marketing as well as press
stuff, obvious news links and articles have not to end on ambassadors. And
everybody who doesn't get this huge difference should re-think that before
answering, please.


Greetings,
  Robert

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Andreas Rau]

I totally agree with your statement

>  Basically, fedora-ambassadors-list is for discussions amongst
>  Ambassadors about event coordination and other tactical or project
>  business needs.
>  
>  Other discussions should take place in fedora-marketing-list. 
-1 concerning the merge

kind regards,
Andreas Rau
Am Montag, den 14.01.2008, 13:42 -0800 schrieb Thomas Chung:
> On 14/01/2008, Paul Stauffer <paulds(a)bu.edu&gt; wrote:
> > Perhaps it would be a good idea for one of the list admins (Max? Thomas?) to
> > do a quick diff of the membership lists of these two lists and see if there
> > is as much of an intersection as we're assuming.  If it turns out that
f-a-l
> > membership is primarily just a subset of f-m-l membership, then the question
> > is really just whether the ambassadors want to continue to have a separate
> > list or not.  And conversely, if the intersection is smaller than we're
> > assuming, then that might imply that a merger is unwarranted.
> >
> > Being on both lists myself, and recognizing the close interaction of the
> > work of both groups, and thus the extremely heavy cross-posting between the
> > two lists, I myself would be happy for a merger, just to cut down the number
> > of duplicate messages in my inbox.  But, y'know, I can deal either way. :)
> 
> Back in March, Karsten Wade touched on this issue[1] already what's
> considered OffTopic[2].
> 
> [1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-March/msg0001...
> [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PostIsOffTopic#fedora-ambassadors-list
> 
>  Basically, fedora-ambassadors-list is for discussions amongst
>  Ambassadors about event coordination and other tactical or project
>  business needs.
>  
>  Other discussions should take place in fedora-marketing-list. 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Thomas Chung
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung
>

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Jon Stanley]

On Jan 14, 2008 5:13 PM, Andreas Rau <rau_a(a)web.de&gt; wrote:

>  -1 concerning the merge 
-1 concerning the merge here too, though we should probably have
something more formal at some point.

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Gerold]

Am Montag, den 14.01.2008, 17:20 -0500 schrieb Jon Stanley:
>  On Jan 14, 2008 5:13 PM, Andreas Rau <rau_a(a)web.de&gt; wrote:
>  
>  > -1 concerning the merge
>  
>  -1 concerning the merge here too, though we should probably have
>  something more formal at some point.
>   
again and again is this point coming up ...

a big -1 also from my point of view; the same as we *decides* last
year :-(

ambassadors, marketing, etc

[Ben Williams]

-1
JamesBenWilliams