[Ambassadors] Proposing Andrew Ward (Award3535) as new mentor for NA

[Neville A. Cross]

El 2014-10-07 12:16, inode0 escribió:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Neville A. Cross <yn1v at 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