bex added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Sorry, this is tl;dr till the end and it is not possible to reply
anymore inline without getting boring to others who want to read this topic. If more clear
means to wear me down I don't think this is useful here.
I don't get why you mix up things, apparently:
We are both in agreement here - we are definitely talking across each other and not too
each other. I don't know why.
I am not advocating fedmsg, I believe it is wrong to measure
ambassador's activity with that, but we do it to make an equal decision to remove
someone from the FAS group or not (and also set the period to 18 months, which is very
long)
I am suggesting that if this is wrong we fix it and pick a real measure, not just use this
one because ... $reasons.
Topic is response expectations, not ambassadors activity, or is this
the same for you?
You brought up activity so I answered it.
I understand you want to remove people from the FAS group just
because they don't reply immediately to an email; If this is still the case I
don't agree. There are other ways to re-compact the ambassador group again.
I want people not listed as a point of contact if they aren't going to answer emails.
I don't care if we do that by FAS group removal, another method, or magic.
Now, after my comment, you speak about point of contacts and not
about the FAS group. What really is your final goal?
Same as it was when I opened this topic. What are the expectations for people to answer
email when they are listed on a web page where they appear to be points of contact.
Also, I think you understood my comment before, it is not necessary
to speak about Fedora interns asking to meet them...
I am still very confused by this interns comment.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/famsco/issue/438