[Ambassadors] New regional Ambassador Mentors

Marcus Moeller mail at marcus-moeller.de
Tue Nov 9 15:52:41 UTC 2010

Dear Christoph,

>> >> This being said I think you have raised enough questions. If you think
>> >> the process needs to be improved, I suggest you prepare something in the
>> >> wiki, then we can discuss it and give it to FAmSCo for ratification.
>> Based on the discussion I have created a proposal:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mmoeller/Ambassador_mentoring_proposal
> I have to admit that I'm disappointed your proposal does not take into
> account what I wrote yesterday about soft skills, needless rules and
> stepping up when there is work to be done. And it hardly is a proposal,
> you just mention a waiting list but no details.

You may have noticed that the way it goes now, does not really seem to
work for all of us (at least when you do not know the time when to
step up, because everywhen you asked seemed to be the wrong time).

I am trying to add some more information about the list (I will try to
avoid the name waiting list, because this might cause confusion and
lead to the wrong direction). A list, who one can nominate him/herself
and could be nominated by others.

I am not yes sure if it's the best way to have a permanent list to
pick from or to have something like a call for mentors (on demand), so
when new mentors are needed for a specific region, this is announced
and ppl who are interested can raise their voice on that.

>> The normal way mentors are elected is that they are choosen by FAmSCo
>> on demand. This leads to the situation that ppl are sometimes told
>> that there are no more mentors needed in a specific region and a few
>> weeks/days later someone else is raised for that position. The one who
>> asked to be a mentor in first place might be frustrated as he/she did
>> not see something like a waiting list (where he/she might be on top)
>> and is not told why someone else is getting the job.
> We don't want to get the *first* people to become mentors, we want the
> *best* people. In German you can even phrase it better: Wir wollen die
> Besten, nicht die Ersten und vor allem nicht die Erstbesten!

I agree on that.

> As we are going to appoint people by their reputation and there soft
> skills and not by time they have been on some waiting list, people will
> be officially passed over. I'm afraid this will cause even more
> frustration: Nominees can compare themselves to others and their
> "failure" is visible to the public.
> Do you really want to expose people that way?

No, I am trying to improve the proposal draft according to these points.


More information about the ambassadors mailing list