On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 16:31 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> We have a
> standing item in the meeting to discuss and vote on sponsors. We
> literally have not received any nominations in quite a while.
Here is the difference between "I have a open ear for your problems;
just come and tell me about it" vs. "I'm looking after you all the time
and think I noticed you have some problems; should we try to solve them
together" again I mentioned in a mail to this list yesterday.
In the Extras days (at least those when I run the meetings) we
*actively* looked out for new sponsors all the time:
Because we had relatively few, and it was a problem. I've not heard of,
or seen in my looking, any issues with too few sponsors.
* we each meeting asked for new sponsor nominations
(self-nominations
or nominations from other people) and thus everyone had to think about
it for a moment
We still did this after Extras. It was largely a waste of time because
we have so few nominations these days.
* in the agenda we send out to the list there was the point
"sponsor
(self-)nominations" quite often (not often enough) -- that way everyone
on the list got a reminder that they can nominate/self-nominate
That can be added back if people think there's value in it.
* new sponsor-nominations were not a FESCO-only thing; we tried to
integrate the existing sponsors into the discussions and decisions, as
they are in the best position for it (¹)
When people actually nominate themselves or get nominated in some other
fashion, this still happens. At least as far as I know.
FESCO doesn't do any of the above properly these days IMHO.
Especially
the first two points are IMHO important and made sure people always got
reminded that they could self-nominate or nominate other people. Most of
the time in fact in were no self-nomination -- often people got
nominated by existing sponsors.
There is nothing, NOTHING, preventing that from happening today.
josh