On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 11:59 PM Myrle Krantz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Based on the preceding discussion, I'm stripping the first sentence out of > the background section. The notice is confusing though if I strip every > mention of funding, so I've left some bits in there. The latest version is > below. > > I believe the discussion is petering out. I'm going to give it another day > and, if nothing happens, I'll move on to the next step. > > Best, > Myrle > > ----------------- > Subject: [NOTICE] D&I intends to coordinate an Outreachy intern program. > > Background: D&I wishes to perform UX research on the experience of members > of underrepresented groups as they get started with our communities. > Internships via Outreachy provide us with an excellent opportunity to do so. > > A sponsor has offered to provide stipends via Outreachy which will cover 3 > interns. D&I plans to provide the following support: > > * Advertise this opportunity to projects and seek mentors & proposals. > * Manage the project submission process to Outreachy, including filtering > out unsuitable project proposals, and, if necessary, making a final > selection of intern-project pairs. > * Ask interns for feedback on their experiences at various times throughout > the internship. > * Provide appropriate and useful feedback to the Foundation and to the > projects about opportunities to improve how welcoming we are, and what we > can improve on. > * Use this as an opportunity to increase awareness and acceptance of the > ASF in communities which we are currently not reaching as well as we would > like. > > If Outreachy receives funding for more than 3 interns for the ASF, we will > facilitate the placement of such additional interns with Apache projects, > but we plan to keep the initial rounds of this project relatively small for > learning purposes. > > ----------------- > The road ahead on this proposal is as follows (** indicates where we are > now): > * Start a [DISCUSS] thread. > ** Allow the discussion to run as long as *new* points are being made. > * Start a [VOTE] thread to run for 72 hours. > * Submit a [NOTICE] to the board. > * Wait 72 hours for potential board objections. > * Get to work.
This is a really good draft, but I have to ask: is this committee planning to put some kind of reasonable metrics in place to evaluate the ROI of this effort? This is very similar to tough questions that Myrle was asking around ROI on spending money for anniversary promotions. In both cases we all know in our gut that these are probably good investments and yet unless you can measure it you can't improve it also applies. Can something tangible be added to the draft so that we don't have to go through the same set of discussions we went through with anniversary promotions expenditure? Thanks, Roman.
