I like that idea, Tim. A few things came up, so I'll open this PR next week.
Thanks, Andrew On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 12:21:43 PM UTC-5 schill...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi folks! > > Andrew (Mshar) how do you feel about reworking: > > > If you know someone who you think should be considered for Individual > Membership or would like to nominate yourself, please fill out this form > <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd5lbWxAO-sylEEjHVKBNIpmHlhdJRf0_LCo8glnLUWd-Q2Sw/viewform?usp=sf_link> > . > > To something that places more focus on self-nomination, with nominating > others as the alternative such as: > > If you would like to apply for Individual Membership, please fill out this > form. You can also nominate others if you know someone who should be > considered. > > My reasoning: > > - The use of "apply" rather than "nominate yourself". People are used > to applying for things for themselves. I imagine fewer nominate themselves > for things making it less comfortable. I think using language that's more > comfortable will encourage people. > - Moving the nomination of others to the end highlights that applying > for yourself is not the exception flow. Again, this should help encourage > people to apply. > > > Thanks for driving this! > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 10:24 PM Andrew Godwin <and...@aeracode.org> wrote: > >> Just want to pop in and say these are great ideas - feel free to copy me >> in on any PR if you want extra opinions! >> >> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 8:26:28 AM UTC-7 Carlton Gibson wrote: >> >>> Great, Thanks Andrew. No urgency 😊 >>> >>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 16:16, Andrew Mshar <acm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Will do, Carlton. >>>> >>>> Tim and Cory, thanks for the suggestions. I'll incorporate those in the >>>> PR and post here when it's ready. Probably not today, but I should be able >>>> to open it before the end of the week. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:10:51 AM UTC-5 carlton...@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Andrew. >>>>> >>>>> I had thought this was a Flatpage (stored in the database) but it's >>>>> not. >>>>> The source is here: >>>>> https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/blob/main/djangoproject/templates/members/individualmember_list.html >>>>> If you wanted to open a PR suggesting your changes, that would be >>>>> amazing 🤩 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Kind Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Carlton >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at 19:51, Tim Allen <fli...@peregrinesalon.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm of the opinion that if you care enough about Django to >>>>>> investigate becoming a member of the DSF, that's enough of a >>>>>> qualification >>>>>> - it is just challenging to formalize that into proper text for the >>>>>> website. Maybe two changes to encourage people to join: >>>>>> >>>>>> - We could tweak *"Running Django-related events or user >>>>>> groups" *to *"Attending or organizing Django-related events or >>>>>> user groups"*. >>>>>> - Add a sentence to the end of the first stanza: "The following >>>>>> are Individual Members of the Django Software Foundation. The DSF >>>>>> appoints >>>>>> individual Members in recognition of their service to the Django >>>>>> community. >>>>>> If you would like to join the DSF, we welcome you. Please feel free >>>>>> to >>>>>> self-nominate for membership." >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Tim >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 11:12:41 AM UTC-5 cory...@gmail.com >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey Andrew, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for drafting this language and I think it looks great. As >>>>>>> someone who only recently applied after hearing it discussed on an >>>>>>> episode >>>>>>> of Django Chat[1], I'm all for the goals of making it more encouraging >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> accessible and think this is a great step in that direction. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here are a few minor thoughts to specific bits: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Service to the Django community takes many forms. Here are some >>>>>>>> examples (non-exhaustive) of categories of work performed by members: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "performed by members" is a little ambiguous as to whether it means >>>>>>> "this is how we evaluate applicants" vs "this is what you'll do if part >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the DSF". Since I think the intention is the former it might make sense >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> change to something like: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Service to the Django community takes many forms. Here are some >>>>>>> (non-exhaustive) examples of the categories of work that might qualify >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> "service":* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Borrowed the list of categories from Andrew Godwin's DEP for the >>>>>>>> update to the technical board. Per Tim's recommendation, do we want to >>>>>>>> include anything about the review process? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When I applied I didn't (and still don't, really) have any >>>>>>> visibility into the process, so it wasn't a deterrent for me, >>>>>>> personally, >>>>>>> but I think having information certainly wouldn't hurt. My two cents >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> be good to put something in, but not necessarily if it slows >>>>>>> down/stalls >>>>>>> this change if for whatever reason that isn't super easy, since I think >>>>>>> this represents an improvement on its own. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, I'm a little unsure about that last bit about applying, but I >>>>>>>> wanted to put something encouraging to folks to apply. Happy to reword >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> if someone has a better suggestion. I'd prefer that to having a full >>>>>>>> rubric >>>>>>>> for membership on this page, primarily because I think it would be >>>>>>>> very >>>>>>>> difficult to nail that down because the work that folks perform can be >>>>>>>> so >>>>>>>> disparate (must have run X django meetups, or triaged Y tickets). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Definitely agree a rubric would cause more problems than it would >>>>>>> help at this stage. The goals of rubrics in terms of increasing >>>>>>> objectivity >>>>>>> and reducing bias are great, but as applied to the already-squishy >>>>>>> definition of "service to the community" it doesn't seem like a good >>>>>>> fit >>>>>>> here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Finally, this is wildly out of scope, but it may make sense to >>>>>>> (either here or separately) attempt to create a bit more content about >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> it means to be an individual member of the DSF. That information is >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> somewhat lacking, and having it somewhere may encourage more people to >>>>>>> apply. One possibility could be to link to one of the recent conference >>>>>>> talks[2][3] on the DSF. But wouldn't want that discussion/information >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> slow down this change. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>> Cory >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://djangochat.com/episodes/read-the-docs-eric-holscher >>>>>>> [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_e-QoeZwEM >>>>>>> [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJnaEZkoVTg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 27, 2022 at 10:03:48 AM UTC-4 >>>>>>>> carlton...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That would be awesome, yes. Fresh eyes likely see more clearly :) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And equally. :) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>> C. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, 27 October 2022 at 15:28:09 UTC+2 acm...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regarding Carlton's points, that does clarify, and I agree about >>>>>>>>>> the open ended qualifiers. I also agree with Tim's points. I'm not >>>>>>>>>> sure we >>>>>>>>>> need another membership level (I'm not opposed, though). Rather, I >>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>> making the current page more transparent will help more folks feel >>>>>>>>>> welcome >>>>>>>>>> and hopefully get more folks (who do fit the criteria) to apply. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If someone wants to draft new language, that would be great. If >>>>>>>>>> not, I may have some time next week to try. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> P.S. Great meeting both of you at Djangocon last week! >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 27, 2022 at 7:41:15 AM UTC-4 >>>>>>>>>> schill...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Carlton, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think I might have been one of those people mentioning the >>>>>>>>>>> lack of definition around the membership requirements. It has held >>>>>>>>>>> me back >>>>>>>>>>> from applying (finally sent one in yesterday). Given the process's >>>>>>>>>>> obscurity (see below), it's daunting to hit submit. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - The number of potential qualifiers is open ended. >>>>>>>>>>> - This should remain, unaltered. It makes the application >>>>>>>>>>> more daunting, but it's also encouraging in that any >>>>>>>>>>> contribution is valid. >>>>>>>>>>> - The degree of involvement per qualifier is not defined. >>>>>>>>>>> - This seems like something that could be done. The >>>>>>>>>>> review process must have a rubric of some sort. >>>>>>>>>>> - There is a valid argument to be made that making >>>>>>>>>>> statements about minimum levels of requirement could lead to >>>>>>>>>>> a person >>>>>>>>>>> disputing a rejection. >>>>>>>>>>> - The review process is not included on the form. >>>>>>>>>>> - Some people will appreciate having more information on >>>>>>>>>>> how the process works. >>>>>>>>>>> - The people who will see this application are not >>>>>>>>>>> included on the form. >>>>>>>>>>> - I know the DSF Board is doing at least part of the >>>>>>>>>>> approvals (I see it in the minutes), but I'm still unsure of >>>>>>>>>>> who will see >>>>>>>>>>> the application itself. If it's the broader DSF membership, >>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>> uncomfortable to send all of you an advertisement about my >>>>>>>>>>> involvement in >>>>>>>>>>> your/our community. >>>>>>>>>>> - There's nothing to help a person decide how to make the >>>>>>>>>>> decision to put yourself out there. >>>>>>>>>>> - Until San Diego I did not have a personal relationship >>>>>>>>>>> with any DSF member, which meant I never sent a DM to an >>>>>>>>>>> existing DSF >>>>>>>>>>> member to ask what the process was like for them or if I was >>>>>>>>>>> qualified. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think if the form itself were a bit more transparent people >>>>>>>>>>> will feel more comfortable sending in an application. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 2:19 AM Carlton Gibson < >>>>>>>>>>> carlton...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrew. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. Good question. I'm not immediately sure if there is a >>>>>>>>>>>> better description of DSF membership around. 🤔 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's meant to be a recognition of contribution to the >>>>>>>>>>>> community, be that to the code in django/django, maintaining a >>>>>>>>>>>> <modifier> >>>>>>>>>>>> third-party package, organising a DjangoCon or community meetup, >>>>>>>>>>>> mentoring, >>>>>>>>>>>> ... — the dots there are that the list incompletable, not simply >>>>>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm too lazy to type, if that makes sense 😜 >>>>>>>>>>>> (These tie roughly to the suggested points for eligibility for >>>>>>>>>>>> being on the Steering Committee in Andrew's proposal >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/django/deps/pull/75/files> except without >>>>>>>>>>>> the "and you're still engaged" requirement that's also there — >>>>>>>>>>>> once earned, >>>>>>>>>>>> it's yours.) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There was some discussion of this at both recent DjangoCons... >>>>>>>>>>>> — there's a bit of a gap for people, perhaps like yourself, first >>>>>>>>>>>> getting >>>>>>>>>>>> involved. One idea was a more open membership level that anyone >>>>>>>>>>>> interested >>>>>>>>>>>> could take up, that would allow easier communication if nothing >>>>>>>>>>>> else. I >>>>>>>>>>>> don't know how those discussions will turn out, but stay tuned 🙂 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I hope that clarifies a litte? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In any case, Welcome aboard! ⛵️ :) Please reach out if you need >>>>>>>>>>>> any help. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kind Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Carlton >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 15:48, Andrew Mshar <acm...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Along the lines of discussions about redefining requirements >>>>>>>>>>>>> for board seats (e.g. >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/django-developers/c/FbNaAq3rz6c), >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it would be helpful to clarify what we want from >>>>>>>>>>>>> individual members >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the DSF here: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.djangoproject.com/foundation/individual-members/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As a non-member who recently made my first contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>> Django, I looked at that page and thought: is that enough for me >>>>>>>>>>>>> to be a >>>>>>>>>>>>> member? I'm not particularly concerned about my own membership, >>>>>>>>>>>>> but rather, >>>>>>>>>>>>> this made me realize that the lack of clarity may prevent others >>>>>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>> joining who otherwise should. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anywhere that we have a more clear outline of what we >>>>>>>>>>>>> expect from members both before they join and after? If not, >>>>>>>>>>>>> could we have >>>>>>>>>>>>> that discussion here to clarify for future members? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django >>>>>>>>>>>>> itself)" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/824f1e56-64f1-44e4-9612-dc121c5d3efcn%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/824f1e56-64f1-44e4-9612-dc121c5d3efcn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" >>>>>>>>>>>> group. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJwKpySfQfgtpoLnCYcwfsaL7g1kgOZU%2BPvKyvggm0UT%3DLpiWg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJwKpySfQfgtpoLnCYcwfsaL7g1kgOZU%2BPvKyvggm0UT%3DLpiWg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/2a6cab2c-2112-4cb0-92c2-54470dd799aan%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/2a6cab2c-2112-4cb0-92c2-54470dd799aan%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/714068fd-a3c4-4ba9-aa69-52f96ef72b5en%40googlegroups.com >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/714068fd-a3c4-4ba9-aa69-52f96ef72b5en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/ee8b40d0-0c37-43b8-b8ca-6438aaf17341n%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/ee8b40d0-0c37-43b8-b8ca-6438aaf17341n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/aa369209-047a-47c4-80f4-7c3a523cb1bbn%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/aa369209-047a-47c4-80f4-7c3a523cb1bbn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5304e916-5ba8-49b4-8444-05f6861ed1b8n%40googlegroups.com.
