Sandro "red" Mathys
red at fedoraproject.org
Mon Nov 8 15:39:12 UTC 2010
On 11/08/2010 04:33 PM, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Sandro "red" Mathys
> <red at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> On 11/08/2010 04:14 PM, Sandro "red" Mathys wrote:
>>> On 11/08/2010 04:09 PM, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Jared K.
>>>> Smith<jsmith at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Christoph Wickert
>>>>> <christoph.wickert at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I think we sent it to Thorsten for a reason: Nominees should not see in
>>>>>> advance what the other nominees wrote. Therefor an independent person
>>>>>> should collect them.
>>>>> I'd be happy to collect them if nobody else steps up to volunteer.
>>>> Thanks. But I am taking FAmSCo one.
>>>> I have already created a page only for FAmSCo and we are adding
>>>> questions there.
>>> Why was creating a new page actually necessary? Why didn't you simply
>>> add the questions under the title you created on the shared page?
> Just to make sure the page is not too long and the questions are not lost.
Right now it looks like FAmSCo candidates are only welcome to answer 3
of the many questions while Marcus and Larry added answers to more than
those 3 questions before you started to separate them. So where exactly
are you making sure questions/answers aren't lost?
Of course, only these 3 questions seem really relevant to FAmSCo
candidates but I also think answering other questions can show how much
you care about other parts of the project.
>>> Why do
>>> ambassadors always need to do everything separated from all the others?
> We are inside the wiki and linked from the election page. That's not
> separate from all the others.
>> ...and just copying questions to the newly created page 1:1 doesn't
>> really make sense at all.
> I don't want a flame war out here. I volunteered to organise
> questions, and I thought that would be the best way. Page/question
> arrangement is not really the issue in this voting. The issue is to
> get more quality questions so that we know who are the best for the
> Let's work on that, please.
More information about the advisory-board