[Ambassadors] FAmSCo (North America) Regional Meeting Reminder - 02/04/2009 20.00

[David Nalley]

Inline reply

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Max Spevack <mspevack at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, inode0 wrote:
>
>> Hypothetically let's assume some issue bubbles up to FAmSCo's attention
>> and FAmSCo decides it needs to be resolved. Perhaps something like
>> "ambassadors need a mentoring program" might be an example. How does FAmSCo
>> decide whether this is something that should be tasked and implemented by
>> FAmSCo or something where FAmSCo might lay out a statement of the goal it
>> believes we should have but leaves the implementation to be handled by local
>> ambassadors in the various regions?
>
> My opinion is this, and I SPEAK ONLY FOR MYSELF:

Same for me

>
> (1) One of the purposes of steering committees in Fedora is to *make
> decisions* that need to be made, so that issues don't just wander around
> forever, or reappear every few months.  I think FAmSCo has been too timid in
> this regard, to be honest.  On places where things are kind of 50/50 like
> the whole active/inactive thing, I think FAmSCo has chickened out and "done
> nothing" because the will of the larger Ambassadors community wasn't clear.
>
> That's wrong.  And I'm glad that in the current iteration of FAmSCo, we are
> trying to analyze some root problems and come up with a plan for solving
> them.


I general I completely agree with this sentiment. It hasn't been too
many months ago that I even declared FAmSCo to be rapidly  becoming
irrelevant, and it's one of the reasons that I ran for FAmSCo, to
either make it more relevant or to guide it toward oblivion. I hope it
is the former rather than the latter.

I think there's a finesse to running a community of volunteers and
that often we fall on the far too lackadaisical  side of things. I'll
say that I think we too often strive for unanimous consent. I firmly
realize that there are and will be times that people don't agree me,
and that's ok. I don't expect to play the part of a Stepford FAmSCo
member. If I disagree with Max on an issue I don't think it will harm
our ongoing work or the relationship that exists, we just have
different opinions. That attitude may well get me voted out at the
next election, but I don't think so.

>
> (2) More than just making decisions as things bubble up, a leadership team
> is reponsible for presenting a vision for the future that is compelling, and
> that people can agree on and believe in.  I believe that FAmSCo is in the
> process of crafting such a vision right now, and that it encompasses an
> overhaul of mentoring and training while respecting the precedents that we
> have set of regional leadership and autonomy.

The vision and policy aspect of things is quite honestly the most
important aspect of FAmSCo. If FAmSCo is the 'court of last resort'
for dealing with ongoing issues, then generally I think there is a
problem. I have no desire to meddle in the affairs of EMEA, NA, APAC,
or any other group from my role as a member of FAmSCo. On the other
hand I fully expect for a number of forward looking directives to
emerge from FAmSCo. Quite honestly if FAmSCo can't provide that
'compelling future guidance' then I seriously doubt it's continued
usefulness.

Please don't take this as me badmouthing FAmSCo - but I think a
constant reevaluation of what we are doing is necessary. I am excited
about the potential I see, and hope that in the coming months you'll
be happy with that representation as well (even if you might not agree
with the end decisions).

John in your specific example (re mentorship) : I would see FAmSCo's role as:
1. Recognizing if this need/problem is global (or subproject wide). If
it is, it's possibly something for FAmSCo to consider. If it isn't,
making sure that the region has the resources and support they need to
deal with the issue.
2. Assuming it is a global need/problem then deciding if it is
something best delegated. For instance, there is a global need for
media every release - I do'nt think that's FAmSCo's business to deal
with aside from assuring that the regions have access to resources to
make media happen.
3. I don't think mentorship fails either of those tests. I think there
is great potential to reuse much of the work with regards to
mentoring, and I think there is much to gain from having a 'global'
policy on mentoring simply to reduce the urge to 1) bikeshedding, and
2) reinvent the wheel 5 times over.
4. Quite honestly I think that identifying the qualifications of an
Ambassador (at joining and post mentorship) is much like deciding the
qualities of a packager and proven packager. It's the steering
committees reponsibility to set those bars, it's the 'sponsors' to
apply those standards to new people and make sure they are met.

That said I don't think that once a FAmSCo member that you are no
longer part of the regional and local groups. I think it's just an
added hat, and I'd fully expect every FAmSCo member to be involved in
implementation, but perhaps not while wearing the FAmSCo Fedora.

>
> (3) FAmSCo has a sacred responsibility (like all Fedora leadership teams) to
> explain and justify its decisions.  If the community doesn't like them, they
> are entirely free to throw the bums out of office completely in the next
> election.

I'll add that I think we need to do so very openly so you know which
of us bums to throw out :)


>
> (4) I have been torn for a while about how vocal I should be in FAmSCo about
> non-budget items.  In 2008, I was sort of an honorary member of FAmSco, and
> therefore I limited myself to the budget stuff.  In 2009, I am an actual
> elected member of FAmSCo, so I am speaking my mind more forcefully.
>
> (5) Like all things in Fedora, I think the job of the leadership team is to
> lay out a vision and a set of actions needed to achieve the vision. If there
> is buy-in, then some people will step up to help.  At that point, I think it
> is entirely appropriate for a FAmSCo member to do some of the
> implementation, but if you have one person all alone saying "let's go this
> way" and no one wants to follow, then there is *not* a mandate to act.
>
> (6) People on FAmSCo need to speak not just for themselves, but they also
> need to consider the needs of their regions.  We are fortunate to have a
> FAmSCo with members from all over the globe.  Those FAmSCo members should be
> attending (and if necessary leading) their local regional Ambassadors
> meetings, and being part of their regional leadership teams, or at least in
> frequent communication with those teams.
>
> (7) I believe that it is entirely unacceptable for any region of the world
> to not have at least a monthly meeting on IRC for ambassadors to feel like
> there is a local community of support around them.
>
> --Max
>
> --
> Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list
> Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ambassadors-list
>