bex added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
@robyduck I realize that we are a volunteer organization, however volunteering comes with
some responsibility. The volunteer gets to decide what they are going to do but is also
making a promise to the rest of us to do it. It seems like with ambassadors we don't
have a willingness to define what we want from people. The current guidelines are
apparently so flexible we are willing to consider the person who is inactive for 17 of
every 18 months equivalent to the person who answers emails daily.
To be more specific, we seem to consider all of the following people Ambassadors
(non-exhaustive list):
* Someone who helps with one event per year (the three month active person mentioned
above)
* Someone who answers emails sent from new people
* Someone who serves in an elected position
* Someone who does things but never reports them
* Someone who has been inactive in all ways for a period of less than 18 months
* Someone who has done one of the above at least once in their life
Because we have no way of differentiating in these people we run into problems where we
simultaneously have a large number of contributors and not enough to do what we want to
do.
I honestly have no opinion on how the title is managed and how the FAS group is arranged.
What does bother me is that we can't effectively handle some things because we
can't figure out who is doing what, if anything. This is even more terrible of an
experience for people trying to figure out how to work with Fedora. As an example, I have
had a reason to send 24 ambassadors across 4 countries email over the last 6 weeks.
I've received exactly 2 responses. This is a horrible response rate.
We can't fix this without identifying people who are actually willing to answer email.
However, there seems to be unwillingness to even ask people what they are doing. Where
is the evidence that so much is happening from people who will be so offended by us asking
what they did that they will leave?
I suspect we are actually scared to find out exactly how many of the 500+ ambassadors are
actually active. However, without this data we won't know where the holes are. Right
now several regions have been struggling with quorums at meetings. Wouldn't it be
better to know that 85% of the active people were present, rather than 3%?
@robyduck I agree with you that we want to tread lightly and to move in a way that is
cautious and assumes good intent. However, I don't see how asking someone "Hey,
we know you've been doing good things over the last few months. We'd like to help
increase the effectiveness of your efforts by letting the world know about them. What
have you been up to?" is a horrible request.
Your point about scaring people away from becoming Ambassadors if they see lots of rules
or requirements is appropriate. However, we are also demotivating those we have when they
see that everyone is treated the same without regard to their actually activity, if any.
I haven't seen any serious proposals that would add a ton of requirements. I think
the most strenuous might be my suggestion that every so often we just ask people to tell
us what they are doing so we can both know what it is and figure out if it is something we
can somehow hook up to fedmsg.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/famsco/issue/438