----- Original Message -----
From: "Truong Anh. Tuan" tuanta@iwayvietnam.com To: "ambassadors" ambassadors@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, October 3, 2014 11:24:59 AM Subject: [Ambassadors] Reminder: APAC irregular meeting 2014-10-04
As we discussed in the meeting last week, we have got some urgent stuffs for FAD Phnom Penh [1] to discuss, review and approve asap so please join us in that irregular meeting.
We had an irregular meeting today. We made all decisions on travel subsidy requests to APAC FAD then discuss a bit on FUDCon APAC 2015 and some other events and ideas.
Please kindly check out the meeting minutes here:
Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-10-04/apac-20141004.201... Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-10-04/apac-20141004.201... Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-10-04/apac-20141004.201...
Kind regards, Tuan
Hello
jbwillia opened a ticket in FAmSCo trac to propose Andrew Ward as a new mentor
https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/368
The new procedure to make this as transparent and quicker states that a new mentor should be nominated by a current mentor and then this should be bring to the mailing list for comments. As jbwillia is not a current mentor and Award3535 has been proposed as mentor before, in FAmSCo was decided to do both step together.
a.- We ask that at least one current mentor second this proposal if they think is good. b.- We will like to hear what are the views about approving a new mentor in the region. It is needed a new mentor in the region? Has anybody any objection? Good comments about his performance about ambassador? Has he extra "stuff" to guide a new ambassador? Anything else that I didn't mention.
I am not implying any bad about Andrew, just listing what some comments may be. By all I know is a fine collaborator.
This issue will be open for one week and then with the feed back it will be voted at FAmSCo meeting.
Best regards
Neville
ok!
2014-10-07 12:21 GMT-05:00 Neville A. Cross yn1v@taygon.com:
Hello
jbwillia opened a ticket in FAmSCo trac to propose Andrew Ward as a new mentor
https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/368
The new procedure to make this as transparent and quicker states that a new mentor should be nominated by a current mentor and then this should be bring to the mailing list for comments. As jbwillia is not a current mentor and Award3535 has been proposed as mentor before, in FAmSCo was decided to do both step together.
a.- We ask that at least one current mentor second this proposal if they think is good. b.- We will like to hear what are the views about approving a new mentor in the region. It is needed a new mentor in the region? Has anybody any objection? Good comments about his performance about ambassador? Has he extra "stuff" to guide a new ambassador? Anything else that I didn't mention.
I am not implying any bad about Andrew, just listing what some comments may be. By all I know is a fine collaborator.
This issue will be open for one week and then with the feed back it will be voted at FAmSCo meeting.
Best regards
Neville
ambassadors mailing list ambassadors@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ambassadors
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Neville A. Cross yn1v@taygon.com wrote:
The new procedure to make this as transparent and quicker states that a new mentor should be nominated by a current mentor and then this should be bring to the mailing list for comments.
I haven't been paying attention to the new mentor process but I can't imagine a process asking for feedback on a mailing list like this one being a good idea. If someone were to say something negative about a proposed mentor should that really be documented forever on a public mailing list? I don't think anyone nominated should be subjected to that even being a possibility.
John
El 2014-10-07 12:16, inode0 escribió:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Neville A. Cross yn1v@taygon.com wrote:
The new procedure to make this as transparent and quicker states that a new mentor should be nominated by a current mentor and then this should be bring to the mailing list for comments.
I haven't been paying attention to the new mentor process but I can't imagine a process asking for feedback on a mailing list like this one being a good idea. If someone were to say something negative about a proposed mentor should that really be documented forever on a public mailing list? I don't think anyone nominated should be subjected to that even being a possibility.
This process was sent to mentor mailing list for comments. There was no response.
I am aware of the shortcomings of making a not_so_positive comment in public. Commenting on the ticket on trac will be also a permanent record, probably not as visible as a mailing list. Reaching out privately to a FAmSCo member may end discussed on the meeting anyway. Meeting logs are also permanent records. One item discussed while figuring out this process was the meaning of no comments. So, maybe there is no need to say something not-so-good.
I think is good that there is a written process. We ended up having a mentor that was not approved ambassador. I am not sure it is perfect porcess. This is the first case, so this is a test. The process may be amended looking at the results. John, I highly value your input as a thoughtful person. Please do share your views on how to improve this.
Best regards
Neville
2014-10-07 20:16 GMT+02:00 inode0 inode0@gmail.com:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Neville A. Cross yn1v@taygon.com wrote:
The new procedure to make this as transparent and quicker states that a new mentor should be nominated by a current mentor and then this should be bring to the mailing list for comments.
I haven't been paying attention to the new mentor process but I can't imagine a process asking for feedback on a mailing list like this one being a good idea. If someone were to say something negative about a proposed mentor should that really be documented forever on a public mailing list? I don't think anyone nominated should be subjected to that even being a possibility.
John
Neville, John, this should have gone to the FAmA-mentors list, not to the ambassadors list. The new process is not so far away from the last one and nobody wants to have an ongoing mentor juget in public. The process is as easy as before and we still need to define it on the wiki (together with other steps which aren't anymore up to date as you pointed out, John). We have a proposal from a mentor nominating a new mentor and will put that into the FAmA-ML, where mentors can give their feedback (or not). If there are any comments for a week, FAmSCo will vote and appoint the new mentor during the next meeting. Same process as before as before more or less, and easy as before. We don't want to have too many rules and I think that's the right way. I hope it is clearer now and we can close this discussion before it gets endless ;) Thanks. Kind regards.
ambassadors@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bm90fox -
inode0 -
Neville A. Cross -
Robert Mayr -
Truong Anh Tuan