I only used the user points scenario as an example. I'm not
advocating we utilize user points for fedora ambassadors in regards
to the matter at hand.
My point was this. If you're looking to reward someone for
contributing you do so by rewarding that person or group of people.
You don't reward them by punishing the other people around them.
A real life example would be if I had 10 engineers working for me as
Software Engineers. 2 of those Engineers have contributed to the
success of the company or product in a manner that justifies a
reward. I do so by promoting those 2 to Senior Software Engineers or
by giving them a pay raise. I DO NOT reward them by demoting the
other 8 engineers to Junior Software Engineers or by lowering the pay
of the 8 other Engineers.
But we create different level of Ambassadors: people who cannot, for
example, join irc meetings, couldn't have irc meeting points etc...
People that live in a Country without any events, couldn't have event
With my idea i want to find a solution that prize equally all the
who work, and, at the end, doesn't do anything to people that aren't
working. We have to understand that, if there are some people that are
doing nothing, it's their responsibility, not our. Yes, we have to
encourage all people, I'm available to do this, now and forever,
have to understand that many people are just not interest or have just
So, if you think it's a punitive proposal you can trow it, but, if you
think it can prize working ambassador, help non active ambassador
for help, and, yes, don't punish inactive members (they won't be
or something similar), you can support this and, if you want,
Tony Guntharp ha scritto:
> There are other ways that can reward more active ambassadors without
> alienating those that are working towards the same goals but are
> so behind the scene.
> For example, on several social networking sites that I've assisted in
> development we award user points for users that contribute user
> generated content. A uploaded video file might be worth 5 points, a
> wiki-entry might be worth 3, etc etc. At certain point totals a user
> gets a title awarded to him befitting his accomplishments. If a user
> registers for the site and doesn't contribute he doesn't get points
> awarded but on the other hand we don't delete him or mark him as
> Digg works much the same way, anyone can register for Digg and
> contribute stories etc. But they don't take any action if you
> and don't contribute.
> This whole proposal of marking an Ambassador Active/Inactive reeks
> to me
> of punishment. That may not have been your intention but your own
> make a strong case for this. Using terms like punitive action
> exemplifies this.
> If you're really trying to give active Ambassadors credit then
> FAMSco should revisit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/
> and hand out these recognition award more than twice in the past 12
> months. Perhaps make this a quarterly award.
> I'm guessing that due to the votes that were cast today (I was
> unable to
> attend and cast my vote unfortunately) that this is going to be a
> contested issue that is already drawing up lines and if we're not
> careful could damage the Ambassador Program in general.
> I for one will gladly leave the program if this resolution passes in
> it's current form.
> Tony Guntharp
> Co-Founder SourceForge.net
> fusion94(a)gmail.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Apr 5, 2007, at 12:21 PM, Francesco Ugolini wrote:
>> The proposal want to give active ambassador the recognition for this
>> work, and the simplest way to award a work is to recognize what was
>> done, in this sense, giving the status of active ambassador will
>> them such recognition.
>> The question i ask myself is: Why people who work are against this
>> proposal? It's really a punitive action? Sincerely, I don't know.
>> idea behind my proposal want only to award working people, but it
>> not to be such.
>> I think I've to reflect over this problem during this night, hoping
>> someone will help me to solve this one.
>> Francesco Ugolini
>> Greg Dekoenigsberg ha scritto:
>>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, Francesco Ugolini wrote:
>>>> For the first draft (we have two more weeks to discuss) the
>>>> results are:
>>>> +1 = 7 votes
>>>> -1 = 7 votes
>>>> This vote say an important thing: we have to work more on this
>>> A few thoughts.
>>> First: if it's not unanimous, we don't have the right idea.
>>> Second: focus on rewarding "active" participants, not penalizing
>>> "passive" participants.
>>> Third: if you decide that an "award" is the right thing, we'd
>>> to fund it.
>> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list