[fedora-india] Ambassadors in India
ashwin.lists at gmail.com
Mon May 10 10:31:49 UTC 2010
On 05/10/2010 02:05 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Ashwin <ashwin.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> It is so demeaning to judge someone for her/his *volunteering*
>> commitments. Beware, this is going to bring in negative feelings.
>> As it is, it is pretty difficult to convert a user to LINUX, and this
>> sort of over zealous drive for accountability is not going to help and
>> make the matters more difficult.
> Being an ambassador is about as difficult as writing code, bugzapping,
> maintaining packages, etc for people in their respective areas of
> specialization. This is not judgement, it is merely minimal
> accountability. It is absolutely irresponsible behaviour to think that
> you can volunteer for something without being accountable for it.
So you are here to make it further more difficult with your
accountability ideas. What a great positive contribution.
>> Exactly, so do not try to paint the volunteers as sinners (for not being
>> *active* enough as per your new found yardsticks of *today*) and shift
>> the goal posts midway of a game.
> You don't have to look at it as sin. It is OK if someone does not have
> the time to contribute to Fedora. I'm not sure what is so offensive
> about being removed from the ambassadors list if you're not going to
> be doing your job of being an ambassador. It is analogous to the
Either you are confused (between *job* and *volunteering*) or you are
too ignorant. NO PAY = NO JOB. JOB=PAY.
Is it a *job* ? Where is the *pay* ? Job but no pay, this notion itself
is offending. It amounts to cheating for free (but accountable) labour.
> "unresponsive maintainer" provision we have for package maintainers.
> Going by your logic we ought to let them be since they would be
> offended otherwise and as a result, let packages rot.
So what do you want to do - hound them, go to police, take them to
courts, and what will you tell the judge, the guy is accountable,
although there is no contract to perform. Grow up guys. Free as in
Freedom we say correct ? But not as in Free Beer we say correct ? So
what you are saying is there no freedom for volunteers, but at the same
time you guys want free beer from volunteers. How sic.
Abandoned babies have new parent/s or go to orphanages, so by your
argument abandoned babies are doomed to rot. How sic.
Abandonment is a reality, so the packages also go into unmaintained
state and then gets assigned to (picked up by) some one else. Cannot
hold collars of those guys who have abandoned so many stuff in past in
spite of putting in quality time when they did contribute. This attitude
is bad towards who contribute what they can at a given point of time. So
what if the contributor projected more than he could contribute.
When Linus wants to put up his shoes, we should judge him and decide, he
promised more and did not deliver what he promised and then remove his
names from all places related to LINUX, because he does not contribute
any more. Correct ....?
>> In-activity (or opposite of hyper activity that you desire) can be for
>> various reasons (long drawn sickness, commitments towards sick parents,
>> new baby, new marriage etc.) but that does not mean the person is no
>> more an advocate of LINUX / Fedora. You think you want to sit on a
>> judgement here any more ?
> Such conditions are generally known, and can easily be brought to the
> forefront through contacts within the community.
Why should one share such personal details ? Just because *you* want it
? Or just to be on the fedora website ? What a rubbish and sic thought.
>> What you guys are saying is that - to be a volunteer (or rather to be
>> listed on the website of Fedora as one) a certain level of activity has
>> to be guaranteed and that too repeatedly. Then why not pay for the base
>> minimum activity (based on your new yardstick), anything above the base
>> minimum is a bonus for Fedora and Redhat is it not ?
>> You want volunteers to be accountable. Why ? Are you questioning their
>> intentions to be a volunteer for Fedora ? If some one added his/her name
>> to the list, I am sure it was done with good intentions. Why should we
>> change that basic status / frame of mind ?
> All volunteers are accountable for their jobs. If you don't want to be
> accountable for something you commit to then you cannot be trusted.
> Genuine reasons like the ones you mentioned are an exception and I'm
> sure they will be considered. It is not a shell script that will be
> doing this. Rahul's statement also very clearly states this:
Think again. Nobody volunteers for a *job*. People get paid for a *job*.
This is like fooling people to work for free. Are you saying Fedora /
Redhat is in the business of cheating in this way ? Check up the meaning
of *volunteer* for a change.
> "Ambassadors are volunteers and might not always be available"
So how come bring in *accountability* even if they are available ?
> so if you're keen on repeating this theme then I understand that
> you're only trying to spread FUD.
I am trying to prevent an exodus of people from a well meaning
initiative of mapping the individuals who have offered to help at any
time in the past. Guys like me, you, rahul can come and go, change
places, but the names of the guys who have offered to help should
remain, as those guys listed as volunteers in the first place, with no
pay. Whether they helped, are helping, or just put their names and went
to moon, how does it matter ?
>> Take an advice, refrain from questioning what the volunteer is doing
>> about his committed role as an ambassador, otherwise pay for it.
> Unnecessarily dramatic statement bordering on utter nonsense.
High-handedness is a sign of weakness. Stop behaving like red tape
bosses of GoI. When these bureaucrats have nothing to do, they sit down
and frame new and irrelevant laws and rules to harass people. Are you
planning to don the same role here ?
>> Based on what I see now, I am happy that I never listed myself as an
>> volunteer / ambassador for Fedora. I continue to be volunteer and I am
>> active in helping new/old LINUX users, as per my own standards of
>> volunteering time at my disposal.
>> Why should one follow the yardsticks for *volunteering* as laid down by
>> you guys ? It sounds so demeaning. It sounds like policies of Microsoft.
>> Wake up guys, it is also important to be open minded. All the names once
>> listed can continue to be there, all it takes is a few mega bytes of
>> space. If someone responds to a request as volunteer, it is great, if
>> not even then it is great, the request can be sent to another volunteer.
> I'm not sure you understand at all. Listing someone's name there as an
> ambassador means that the person is available to be contacted and is
> in the loop with the current status of Fedora. If someone is provably
> not involved at all and is simply taking up bytes, there is no point
> in putting him/her there since it is only going to turn a potential
> contributor away since (s)he could not get in touch with that person.
So it is your / Fedora / Redhat problem that you are not able to track
who is active and available or not. Then solve it at your end.
So first you want to spend your energies in proving that some one does
not contribute (what positive contribution is here - I cannot
understand). Once you are done with your proving, the guy ends up being
removed from the list (What a great achievement).
There are many other ways of ensuring that the help reaches. The right
group of people from a common place can have a email alias. So if some
one wants to reach a person=A (as listed in the website) for a
location=TOWN, then a cc: should automatically be sent to all listed for
the location group at TOWN.
It will promote the fedora web interface to be used more where a
tracking system can be built to check what happened to the request for
help by sending an email to the help requester later for feedback.
Make the system and yourself more efficient,
do not judge a noble intent of a volunteer.
More information about the india