A clarification about Fedora-it.org

[Kévin Raymond]

> >>
> >>Just a little reply...maybe this thing should be discuss on fedora
> >>ambassadors mailing list...
> >>It should much great to work with existing and active Italian fedora
> >>ambassadors and not with single person that don't collaborate with other
> >>people or other teams.
> >>
> >
> >Dear Mario, I do not think this is the place to have a discussion with
> >these tones, as shareable, I do not think that others are interested in
> >reading these boring things.
> 
> +1

Agree, this is not really to the website team to decide.
It should be the Italian community, why not through the ambassador mailing list.
But this has also been raised to the advisory-board mailing list. We are
spreading the discussion (without going really further).

> 
> >>I prefer, and I think users prefer too, to see one specific local and
> >>"official" community portal.
> >>
> >
> >I believe he was told there was no distinction between official and local?
> >Or am I wrong.
> 
> No, you're perfectly right. There is no official local community,
> there exist only strong and unified communities which have become a
> sort of officiality in the end-user view, but nothing more.
> 
> >What users will prefer them to decide, I do not think you can take
> >arbitrarily the right to say what users prefer, it is not a democratic
> >reasoning.
> 
> +1

It is far easier to have only one portal, one forum…
But if you guys feel the need to have a second one, that's because something is
not going right for everyone.

> 
> >I am really disappointed to view this request from Stefano Mainardi and
> >>Antonio Trande. They don't really collaborate with existing Italian Fedora
> >>community...and with Italian Fedora Ambassadors. I and other Italian Fedora
> >>Ambassadors read this request from fedora-website mailing list and not from
> >>a discussion in our team.
> >>
> >
> >For me personally do not collaborate with the various ambassadors, but I
> >know exactly that different users who attend "Fedora-it" have been very
> >active in the "official" community.
> >
> >I've done in the past, but I follow and actively collaborate with other
> >open-source projects, I say this to clarify my position with you, if you
> >need to clear ideas about me. Even a simple Google search might help.
> >
> >I hope fedoraproject collaborator could understand my point of view and my

We could understand facts, but we won't understand it as an Italian contributor.
We are abroad and only know what is written here. We don't *feel* how goes the
community.
Giving a GO for a website is a hard question. To prevent misjudging, should we
just say "yes" if the domain name is approved?.

I believe that there should be only one local community portal, but some other
could serve specific purpose. Like for test, devels, simple users… There are
many ways. Of course if it's only a dupplicate… One would grow faster.
Furthermore, infrastructure and moderation take lot of time, the time that we
loose at contribution.

There is no easy answer.


[snip]

> 
> Lets do something for the end-users of Fedora, it's the best thing we can do.
> 

Our main goal is not to gather users… But to grab contributors :)
(But yeah I got your point).

The main problem here is that we don't have contributors willing to help sorting that,
but the one directly involved.

IMHO it is not only about ambassadors, I know many contributors more actives at
spreading Fedora/going to events than real ambassadors. This is a Project wide
question involving the whole local community.
That's why I believe advisory-board could help (but they are not answering).

Could an Italian contributor sum up this thread on the existing one? 
Please, be fair and explain the facts not what *you* want.
If needed, I could do so, but not before next week.


-- 
Kévin Raymond
(Shaiton)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/websites/attachments/20120530/bbefbf08/attachment.sig>